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

Re: [PrimeNumbers] wrong comment in db?

Expand Messages
  • Chris Caldwell
    ... I get this often; folks sometimes even object that their own primes are not generalized Woodalls. I ll add a note to the top-20 page and maybe the
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, yummie_55555 wrote:
      > When making an generalized Woodall prime record history i noticed the
      > prime 187·2^47877-1 in Chris' Database.
      > (http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=13129)
      >
      > Either i am totally studip and i overlook something or that prime is
      > actually not a generalized woodall, though it has that comment. I
      > can't find out the base for it: 187·2^47877-1 = 23936*4^23935-1 is
      > pretty near, but no gw too.

      I get this often; folks sometimes even object that their own primes are
      not generalized Woodalls. I'll add a note to the top-20 page and maybe
      the glossary to help folks identify these.

      In the example above the key is to note 187*2^5 divides 47877-5 (quotient
      8), so the number could be written:

      (187*2^5) * (2^8) ^ (187*2^5) - 1

      I think you also created a false dichotomy above--you are not totally
      stupid for missing this, I know I can't spot many of them without a
      program! So that is why my system is automated as best I can make it.


      Chris
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.