--- In firstname.lastname@example.org
"mikeoakes2" <mikeoakes2@...> wrote:
> > 1080905, 1739089, 1992641, 2110159, found in only a few minutes.
> > A few minutes later these turned up: 4013569, 4638985.
> > If you will only think Chinese, such numbers
> > may be found in GHz-minutes, rather than GHz-years :-)
> I have a cunning script which found these first
> 7 non-Carmichaels in 9313 msecs.
Excellent: post-hoc speed-ups are always welcome.
Yet first credit should always go to the first
discovery. Happily this also goes to you:
> I have just finished a 1 GHz-yr investigation of this Conjecture
> In every case but one, n was indeed a Carmichael number,
> but for n = 507529 = 11*29*37*43, the conditions are satisfied
a) To discover 1 non-Carmichael: 1 GHz-year (MO)
b) To discover 6 more: less than 1 GHz-hour (DB)
c) To recover all 7: less than 1 GHz-minute (MO)
Which is the more meritorious?
I incline to think : (a), by MO, at beginning of this process.