Your first paragraph is very helpful. Your second paragraph has an
unfortunate condescending tone. I know people are frequently
thinking they have discovered something new that is 400 years old.
It is great to point them to the earlier work, but I do not want
people to be afraid to post to the list because they might be subtly
--- In email@example.com
, "Milton Brown" <miltbrown@e...>
> Residues for the Powers of Prime numbers are discussed
> in detail in "Elementary Number Theory" by Jones and Jones
> with a separate section on page 135.
> You should look there, instead of suggesting that some new
> theory is being developed here.
> Milton L. Brown
> miltbrown at earthlink.net
> > [Original Message]
> > From: richard_heylen <rick.heylen@m...>
> > To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Date: 6/8/2004 5:24:23 AM
> > Subject: [PrimeNumbers] Re: Question on power residues...
> > --- In email@example.com, David Cleaver <wraithx@m...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Yeah, it looks like this method will not work
> > > when the numbers is of the form ((2^prime) - 1).
> > > However, this may be the only class of numbers
> > > that this method is unnable to factor. If you
> > > can think of any other numbers that might have
> > > this property, or if you know of any numbers that
> > > can never be factored by the pollard-rho algorithm,
> > > please let me know. Thanks for your input so far.
> > As I implied, any strong base 2 psuedoprime will do.
> > So from
> > http://www.research.att.com/cgi-
> > bin/access.cgi/as/njas/sequences/eisA.cgi?Anum=A001262
> > 2047,3277,4033,4681,8321,15841,29341,42799,49141,52633,
> > 65281,74665,80581,85489,88357,90751,104653,130561,196093,
> > 220729,233017,252601,253241,256999,271951,280601,314821,
> > 357761,390937,458989,476971,486737
> > Richard Heylen
> > Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-
> > The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/
> > Yahoo! Groups Links