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

Re: Lucas super-pseudoprimes for Q <> 1

Expand Messages
  • djbroadhurst
    ... Yes. ... Yes. David
    Message 1 of 46 , Nov 4, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com,
      "mikeoakes2" <mikeoakes2@...> wrote:

      > I think the best thing about a) was that it was truly
      > exhaustive, in that it assumed no restriction on the number
      > of factors of n

      Yes.

      > and as we have seen, the bulk of the time needed is for
      > checking out semiprimes (even with your CRT improvement).

      Yes.

      David
    • djbroadhurst
      ... http://physics.open.ac.uk/~dbroadhu/cert/dbmo116.out gives my 116, in the format [n, factors, number of solutions] With n
      Message 46 of 46 , Nov 9, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com,
        "mikeoakes2" <mikeoakes2@...> wrote:

        > > My revised count up to 2*10^10 is 116.
        > My (original) count up to 2*10^10 was 105.
        > So it must have missed 11, i.e. a bigger proportion.

        http://physics.open.ac.uk/~dbroadhu/cert/dbmo116.out
        gives my 116, in the format [n, factors, number of solutions]

        With n < 2*10^10, the record-holder for the number of solutions is
        [2214495361, [13, 17, 23, 29, 83, 181], 147407]
        which googles quite nicely, linking to
        http://www.cs.rit.edu/usr/local/pub/pga/fibonacci_pp

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