Re: Primes of the form 4^n-3
- --- In primenumbers@y..., paulunderwood@m... wrote:
> HiEspecially the 4^720-3 number ;) Might you mean 4^7200-3 instead?
>Paul Leyland askedme the other day about 4^n-3. As far as I know the
>4^n-3 not proven prime. n:
>In both case I tested to n=17400. You might want to check these are
> Paul Leyland askedme the other day about 4^n-3. As far as I know theIndeed, as I am toying with the idea of searching for further examples
> biggest "ordinary prime" (whatever that is) is 4^7057-3 proven by
> Preda Milhailescu.
and putting up a web page to coordinate the search, should anyone else
be interested in joining in. However, pressure of other work means that
it won't happen in the immediate future 8-(
> I am intersted in these because I have never found a composite of[Lists deleted.]
> the form F:2^N-2^k-1 for which F|2^F-2. In the above case k=1 and
> Modular reducton of a 2N bit number is particularly easy since
> 2^N=2+1 and hence requires just two shifts and additions. Moreover to
> test F we could check 2^(2^N)=8 modulo F i.e take N (FFT) squarings
> of 2, use the simple modular reduction, and finally check to see if
> this equals 8.
> I checked an old email file to the old utm list server for back on
> the 3rd May 1999.I wrote:
> >4^n-3 is proven prime. n:
Thanks Paul! This will help populate the web page, and also gives a few
nice test cases to pick up really stupid bugs.