20091130, 19:18  #1 
Bemusing Prompter
"Danny"
Dec 2002
California
2×3^{2}×137 Posts 
Wagstaff number primality test?
A while ago, there was a thread about a possible new primality test for Wagstaff numbers that had the same runtime as the LucasLehmer test. However, it was considered to be only a conjecture due to a some reported errors in the proof.
This proof would be an important milestone in number theory, yet there has been no new posts in that thread since February. So far, no major academic journals or mathematics websites have mentioned this conjecture. Does anyone know if there has been any progress with the proof? 
20091130, 19:36  #2  
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)
3^{2}·5·7·19 Posts 
Quote:
i still think that it might be a fast way of finding huge prps 

20091130, 19:38  #3 
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2^{5}×7^{2} Posts 
I know no progress about the proof. But there is a fast mpir/gmp implementation for it that I have written some month ago, see: http://mpirdevel.googlegroups.com/w...krTYJH3lVGu2Z5
Last fiddled with by R. Gerbicz on 20091130 at 19:38 
20100102, 11:03  #4 
Feb 2004
France
3^{2}×103 Posts 
Ideas for a proof
Hi,
Last year, I spent some time trying to build a proof for a modifiedLLT using Cycles for Mersenne numbers. Without any success. However, I'm only an amateur and I know quite well only some old methods used by Lucas, Lehmer and Williams. I planned to publish my draft on this forum, so that other people can look and say if, in this garbish, there are some good ideas. I'll do that some day... I know that Sir Wagstaff asked a student to look for a proof for the VrbaReix conjecture for Wagstaff numbers. No fresh news. I tried to inform several Mathematicians over the world that have worked or are working in this LLt area about this conjecture. I also have summarized the work on my Blog . (I would recommend you to read the French poetry I provide there ! Aragon !!) Also, I'll pay 100 euros to the first guy who can provide a proof. (I would pay much more if I was richer ! ) Jean Pené has implemented the VrbaReix PRP test within LLR, which is based on the prime95 code. Very fast ! Just a clarification : the conjectures are true theorems about PRPs : if a Wagstaff, Mersenne or Fermat number is prime, then the property holds. So, VrbaReix test IS a very fast way for finding a Wagstaff PRP. Out of the conjecture, my opinion is that the DiGraph under x^22 modulo a number N is a very interesting subject to be studied. I've studied some different forms of numbers and, in each case, the DiGraph of the prime numbers have properties that the nonprime numbers seems not to have. The problem is to find a way to building proofs... (too difficult for me !). The Number Theory books I've looked at recently still do not even talk about using LLT for proving that a N+1 number (N easy to factor, like Fermats) is prime. Recently, I've discovered that Kustaa Inkeri, in 1960, provided a proof for the LLT used as a primality proof for Fermats, with seed 8 instead of the 5 I'm using. Who will continue the wonderful work of Lucas, Lehmer, Williams, ... ? Regards, Tony Last fiddled with by T.Rex on 20100102 at 11:30 
20100102, 13:33  #5 
Feb 2004
France
3^{2}·103 Posts 
My draft paper
I've provided my (DRAFT!!!!!!!) paper in this thread.

20100102, 18:13  #6 
Einyen
Dec 2003
Denmark
3,313 Posts 

20100104, 18:29  #8 
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada
3·17·23 Posts 
I wonder how the speed of the LLR version compares to R. Gerbicz's GMP/MPIR version. Has anyone actually tested them both?
Last fiddled with by Jeff Gilchrist on 20100104 at 18:29 
20100104, 19:53  #9 
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2^{5}·7^{2} Posts 
Gmp/mpir is slower by a lot, for example for q=127031 my version takes about 235 sec. using mpir1.3.0, while llr372 takes about only 16 seconds. Both of the them is using only one core, but gmp/mpir isn't using complex numbers for FFT, and that is a big disadvantage in speed. (The difference probably not so large in general, because 127031 is close to 2^17).

20100104, 21:00  #10  
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)
3^{2}×5×7×19 Posts 
Quote:


20100104, 21:04  #11 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
2^{3}×3×5^{2}×11 Posts 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Modifying the Lucas Lehmer Primality Test into a fast test of nothing  Trilo  Miscellaneous Math  25  20180311 23:20 
Basic Number Theory 9: a primality test and a cryptosystem  Nick  Number Theory Discussion Group  9  20161124 21:11 
500€ Reward for a proof for the Wagstaff primality test conjecture  Tony Reix  Wagstaff PRP Search  7  20131010 01:23 
PRIMALITY PROOF for Wagstaff numbers!  AntonVrba  Math  96  20090225 10:37 
A primality test for Fermat numbers faster than Pépin's test ?  T.Rex  Math  0  20041026 21:37 