Re: [PrimeNumbers] Sixteen or Bust
> > If Stephen Gibson was notified that his hardware found a PRP by someonethat
> > else, he cannot be the discoverer. The discoverer is the first human
> > checked (or will check?) the primality by running the proof on acomputer.
The context of their message shows _clearly_ that they have checked the
primality using one of the following softwares:
(a) your Proth.exe
(c) or their self written program
> Would I be truly evil if I were to help SB out by "discovering" thisnumber
> tomorrow?You can help all the community by checking the number to see if divides a
GF(n,b) with small base. There is a very small chance that it be a Fermat
factor or a factor of GF6, GF10 or GF12.
- Hi All,
I must say that it distresses me greatly to see such rancour amongst
such great minds.
I never realised that people were reserving( proclaiming exclusive
right to) ranges of k's, n's or whatever.
I thought the idea was to make it known that you were searching a
particular area so that other people didn't waste CPU cycles redoing
My decision to select n!11-1 to search based on the fact that it was
marked as free was not so much that it was marked as free but that I
was sure that I wasn't redoing someone elses work.
With !n there are an infinite number of choices so I didn't have to
tread on any toes.
With only 17 sierpinski K available, and as is obvious from SOB,
100's of willing searchers how could we expect one person to be able
to search one K for what could be years.
Again I state I am currently searching n!11-1 (n=1-200000) n!11+1 (1-
200000) and n!2(30000-50000). I have 13 machines searching various
ranges some top-down but intend to complete all 3 ranges (including
redoing 35K of numbers which were done with my p4). If somone thinks
it is worth their time also tesing within theses ranges the so be it.
I DON'T own them, there just numbers!