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

Re: 4 Fermat and 1 Lucas [freely admitted by its author to be hopeless]

Expand Messages
  • djbroadhurst
    ... So, Paul, my old friend, you have a month to read my secret-spilling tutorial http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/message/25241 to understand
    Message 1 of 11 , Aug 2, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In primenumbers@yahoogroups.com,
      "paulunderwooduk" <paulunderwood@...> wrote:

      > > fooled 10 times
      > >
      > > NB: Please, Paul, no more wriggles, sign tests, gcds, extra Fermats,
      > > new choices of [P,Q], this August. The Gremlins are sunning
      > > themselves and find it irkesome to tool up for such vain tests.
      >
      > Those are good counterexamples

      So, Paul, my old friend, you have a month to read
      my secret-spilling tutorial
      http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/primenumbers/message/25241
      to understand this one line forger's recipe:

      print(subst(algdep(2*cos(2*Pi/5),2),x,x^8))
      x^16 + x^8 - 1

      Of course were you to add gcd(x^16+x^8-1,n)==1, in September,
      the Gremlins would work with different cosines.

      David
    • WarrenS
      Tao, Harcos, Englesma, et al seem to have stalled trying to improve Zhang s upper bound of 70,000,000. They claim to have confirmed they got it down to 5414
      Message 2 of 11 , Aug 4, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Tao, Harcos, Englesma, et al seem to have stalled trying to improve Zhang's upper
        bound of 70,000,000. They claim to have confirmed they got it down to 5414 but look
        like they aren't going to be able to go much further (perhaps can push it a bit below 5000
        if combine all their juice?).


        http://michaelnielsen.org/polymath1/index.php?title=Bounded_gaps_between_primes
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.