mersenneforum.org Except for the last page, the previous thread became a bit long.
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2017-04-21, 01:52 #34 storflyt32   Feb 2013 7·67 Posts Anyway, adding a P125 to my list now, together with a P15, I have not checked yet. But also being reminded that unlike the highest point or mountain of my own country, Matterhorn as a mountain is a steep cliff and therefore inaccessible, or not climbable, on both or all sides. Here I was giving that of infinity a thought and also a possible approach when it comes to this subject, at least by means of being a possible number. In the world of Project Management, like a couple of other places, you could be setting possible goals for that of a possible achievement. Meaning that possibly one third of a vertical wall or climb for a mountain could be climbed or ascended in one piece or portion. Such a thing is not available or present when it comes to that of infinity, or even RSA-1024, for that matter. Yes, we call such things "checkpoints" when it comes to that of computing and also such a thing is having a specific or given name when it comes to that of Project Management as well. For perhaps one thing it could be "Mission impossible" when it comes to a given thing, but does that mean Project Management, or possibly goals? "We choose to be going to the Moon..." and so on. Everyone knows that a prime number, or factor like 2^127-1 does not come from either 2, or 10, for that matter. So, which end, if I may ask. The fact is that except for 1, which is either "dubious", or no prime number at all, every or all other numbers could be regarded or viewed as composite for a simple reason. Should it be 2 * 3 * 5 * 7, or perhaps 2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * 11 and so on, only because of the 2? Or is there rather another or different reason for this happening, or being the case? This because you are not supposed to neither factorize, or even be sieving, except for LLR, when it comes to numbers like 100 or 200 for this and this should be quite obvious. The only thing in the end is that you could determine a number to be at least composite, but without knowing the factors, making up such a number. Back tomorrow. Should tell that in the early morning I forgot keying in the whole number using the factorization software and it became a P154 back in return the opposite way. When next using the correct number by adding some nine digits on the second line, it also became a smaller factor, but here it was more difficult. Except for that, the cup of coffee does not help today and I only have for one more over the weekend. Also both a P20 and P30 together with a P108 and I will continue on this now. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2017-04-22 at 15:52
 2017-05-14, 09:36 #40 storflyt32   Feb 2013 7×67 Posts Should I perhaps make it a new one here? http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000930103302 In fact there should be even one more here, because it is part of a C203. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000926692603 This one is perhaps a bit tricky, or at least difficult as you probably know. Rather it becomes the flip-flop side which becomes the question here. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000930107231 The C157 here is not going to make it, as far as I can tell, like my own keyboard and also near-sighted eyes. Ran it most of yesterday and when returning back after sleeping off the last three beers, it was still running. Here, in fact, you do have some three or four quite nice factors and therefore one could assume that both the number as a whole and also its part or parts should be "weighted" of sorts. The C157 is a semiprime number of sorts,meaning two factors. Is it possible to trick or perhaps fool a bit around and next make me think that I could have the factors in some way? I went a little down my PList for the factors and came across two such below the lines for the factors of RSA-155 (the "slingshot" number), Therefore it became two P78 factors for this. Next "dividing" (supposedly means trial-dividing, but may not always work either), first gave me a couple of small ones, next a P13 and a P62, which for both I kept. The larger of the two next did the same, but except for the small ones, once again, here it became a P14 and next a C60 which needed a little more. With 2^21 curves using ecm it became a pair of P23 and P37 factors. Next, that none of this has been reported yet, only lies around here. The point is that multiplying the P37 with the P62, for example, it becomes not that easy. C99 = 107697754157460129081548455186886430139227760179467616771326956041448673303218637276768466821961457 P62 = 64673383884991095148967654883745938257171644262615403280008869 P37 = 1665256210328802682226191058712930653 I could perhaps switch the order of the factors for readability, but except for that I have not tried out the C99. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2017-05-14 at 09:37
 2017-05-16, 03:51 #41 storflyt32   Feb 2013 7×67 Posts 02:37 AM local time right now. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000930519825 Dang, this one did not make it with 2^22 curves using ecm (and not 2^21 curves). Apparently stuck on this one for now. Two others apparently came loose and one of them needed quite a bit. At least only composite in the FDB when I last checked, perhaps earlier today. Possibly adding the factors before going to bed, but the funeral today took a toll and needs continuation, or perhaps restart tomorrow. This processor probably is a bit better on the somewhat larger factors and except for the stuck fingers and hands, I got most of it back in return. The only thing possible for now is perhaps relate a couple of hundreds of these against each other by just multiplying. If so, it perhaps could become a "stacked" nature where almost everything could be possible. If I am not wrong, the Mandelbrot set is not necessarily a wild guess, or even speculative theory either, although or even not being about perhaps prime numbers or factors either. Meeting up with a couple of relatives today for the funeral, including an aunt I had not seen in a while, makes a reminder of both ageing and also the battle of the sexes. The aunt who chose to give me some help with both the flies, as well as that of too much food being stored, making it a surplus, is having her own habits, as well as personality. Next the fact that you next could ask yourself where it all came from, because it is supposed to be a shared thing, including responsibility. The likelihood that a carpenter becomes the father of a genius, only because the mother was in the kitchen, is when it comes to me not too much likely. Oh, me getting drunk, perhaps. Where are the factors? Do not take me literally, by the way. Became a new post, but meant to continue. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2017-05-16 at 22:39
 2017-05-16, 22:35 #42 storflyt32   Feb 2013 7×67 Posts Perhaps a line a bit too long above, but I ended up with a couple a beers last evening and also quite tired after the funeral. Noticing that someone did the mentioned C98. Quite a feat, or perhaps accomplishment there and I could have a look at the flip-around for this in order to see where it gets. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000930523910 Here is another one for you, if you happen to be interested. Also this one did not make it with 2^22 curves using ecm. Giving it yet another try with SIQS, it says 107696 relations is being needed. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000932062488 Also noticing this C80, which by means of ecm using 2^22 curves is some halfway right now. I think a glass of milk, or perhaps mineral water is needed, because I ended up putting the soup in the bottle for cooking and next it does not become any coffee at all. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000932062488 Becomes yet another day and next continuing the session. Apparently someone did me a favor, because I did not do this one. But what about the individual factors here? In fact I think this is a quite nice one when it comes to such. Giving a try on a C103 right now and this could probably take a day or two. The number of relations needed for the SIQS is here some 141440, so therefore not a quick one. Becomes at least the dinner first, before anything else, but supposedly there should be more P70 factors or the like than similar P130 or P140 factors. Still, the fact that we are supposed to do our factorizations on the smaller numbers rather than the larger ones. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000933975091 http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000933975393 The P38 in the second link is more or less like climbing Matterhorn rather than Mount Everest. This one took a little while at getting at and is quite similar to that of possible RSA-128 number in size, at least when it comes to a single, or individual factor. Now I will finish off the second beer before next going to bed. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000933971070 Also here is a P38 which could next be added to the rest of it. The remaining, composite number here becomes a C639. 07:20 AM in the morning and I need the cup of coffee first. This one is slightly larger than the previous one of same size, but except for that, not related. Becomes the 1016... number at the other end and the second P38 definitely does not "divide" in that direction. http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000822445183 First idea of thought is multiplying the C456 with the C639, next take the square root and after that, or subsequently, next use ecm on the answer. Yes, it apparently works and becomes a PRP522, but directly from the plate or oven and needs storing locally first. Next it becomes at least a P16 and P17 from the C1133 of (2^4096+1), but next "trial-dividing" illegally once again, or perhaps in error, it becomes the small ones as usual, next a P19 and P394 pair of factors. Also the top part of it, meaning the output, vanishes from the buffer and needs a redo in order to make it complete, or perhaps get it all. I better start working on the rest of it. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 2017-05-28 at 22:34

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post R.D. Silverman GMP-ECM 4 2009-11-14 19:57 grandpascorpion Programming 7 2009-10-04 12:13 panic Hardware 9 2009-09-11 05:11 gribozavr Twin Prime Search 10 2007-01-19 21:06 JuanTutors Marin's Mersenne-aries 1 2004-08-29 17:23

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:13.

Tue Jun 28 03:13:36 UTC 2022 up 75 days, 1:14, 1 user, load averages: 0.80, 1.06, 1.19