Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

20826RE: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Some Benchmark Primality Test

Expand Messages
  • cino hilliard
    Sep 1, 2009
      Hi David,

      >So before you do primo, do pfgw -tc

      anayway, I thought we were benchmarking in this last post?

      I am still curious how long it would take primo to prove 31838235*2^29717+1 is prime.

      At fiirst, I thought time was proportional to the number of digits but now I realize
      that ain't so. "When in doubt, specialize"

      Not all lost though. I learned a new word.

      I tried pfgw on the primo top entry of the top 20.


      c:\pfgw>pfgw -tc -q2^^29727+20273
      PFGW Version 20090725.Win_Dev (Beta 'caveat utilitor') [GWNUM 25.12]

      Primality testing 2^29727+20273 [N-1/N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
      Running N-1 test using base 11
      Running N+1 test using discriminant 19, base 9+sqrt(19)
      Calling N+1 BLS with factored part 0.08% and helper 0.07% (0.30% proof)
      2^29727+20273 is Fermat and Lucas PRP! (12.4107s+0.0008s)


      What dominion does 31838235*2^29717+1 have over 1*2^29727+20273?

      Is 80 days the best that can be done for the top primo prime?


      pfgw still ROCKS!


      To: primenumbers@yahoogroups.com
      From: d.broadhurst@...
      Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 22:24:24 +0000
      Subject: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Some Benchmark Primality Test

      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com,
      cino hilliard <hillcino368@...> wrote:

      > 31838235*2^29717+1 is prime! (15.3991s+0.0311s)


      > This 8954 digit number will be the top primo candidate
      > if you have the time

      Using ECPP to re-prove a prime already proven by BLS
      would be an exercise in fatuity.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic