- In a message dated 20/04/2001 21:30:09 GMT Daylight Time,

HLifchitz@... writes:

>Please continue sending me new probable primes (but larger than 12000

digits).

Why the lower limit on size, Henri? There is a natural cutoff set by the

ability of programs like Titanix to prove primality - currently about 2300

digits - so people aren't going to send you smaller PRPs than that. And as

these prgrams (and hardware speeds) improve, the smaller candidates on your

list would gradually get removed.

At present there is a "vacuum", with nowhere for interesting PRPs in the

range 2300-12000 digits to go. So it would be hospitable of you to give them

a home. Moreover, they would then be publicly visible, making it easier for

someone to take up the challenge of proving them prime as soon as that

becomes feasible.

Mike Oakes - Hi Mike,

There is an error in the value of n = 4497, the value should be n = 44497.

Thanks for the quick response.

Peter.

-----Original Message-----

From: Mikeoakes2@... <Mikeoakes2@...>

To: mohales@... <mohales@...>

Cc: PrimeNumbers@yahoogroups.com <PrimeNumbers@yahoogroups.com>

Date: Friday, May 18, 2001 10:03 PM

Subject: Re: [PrimeNumbers] PRP Top 50 has become PRP Top 100

In a message dated 18/05/2001 14:29:21 GMT Daylight Time,

mohales@... writes:

> Primeform gives the following as PRP

Hi Peter,

> 6*k*(2^n - 1 - k ) + 2^n - 1, with n = 4497, k = 8939.

> digit number = 13400.

> A beginner in this business, I would like confirmation of this result from

> someone.

> Thank you.

> Peter Lesala.

Something must be wrong with your expression as (if we do the substitutions

for n and k) PFGW says:-

6*8939*(2^4497-1-8939)+2^4497-1 has factors: 7

Want to double-check it?

Mike Oakes