Re: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Sixteen or Bust
- --On Sunday, December 01, 2002 6:10 PM +0000 sander3005
> --- In primenumbers@y..., "Yves Gallot" <galloty@w...> wrote:Those 5 primes were discovered by people who knew which numbers they were
>> These sorts of searches are totally depersonalized :o(
> But the 5 largest known primes were discovered this way
testing, and could have chosen other had they wished. Also, the discovers
actually got to see that the numbers were *proven primes*.
I think there's a distinction.
- 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!