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

Re: Sixteen or Bust

Expand Messages
  • sander3005
    ... The discoverer of the PRP also knew what number he was testing. I don t see how thats different with GIMPS ... Thats true, but it would be very inefficient
    Message 1 of 34 , Dec 1, 2002
      --- In primenumbers@y..., nrussell@a... wrote:
      > > But the 5 largest known primes were discovered this way
      >
      > Those 5 primes were discovered by people who knew which numbers
      > they were testing, and could have chosen other had they wished.

      The discoverer of the PRP also knew what number he was testing. I
      don't see how thats different with GIMPS

      > Also, the discovers actually got to see that the numbers were
      > *proven primes*.

      Thats true, but it would be very inefficient to test every number for
      primility. Isn't everybody using PFGW or PRP not doing the same?

      Half of the replies on this list is by people who haven't read the
      SoB website at all. There must clearly be something more between a
      few members of this list and the SoB project besides that they took a
      few numbers that were in progress by others
    • Ken Davis
      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
      Message 34 of 34 , Dec 2, 2002
        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
        work.
        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!
        cheers
        Ken
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.