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

gen fermat b=10

Expand Messages
  • MICHAEL HARTLEY
    Dear All, Are there any primes of the form 10^(2^k)+1 known for k 1 ? Yours, Mike H... Michael Hartley : Michael.Hartley@sit.edu.my Head, Department of
    Message 1 of 3 , Nov 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear All,

      Are there any primes of the form 10^(2^k)+1 known for k>1 ?

      Yours, Mike H...

      Michael Hartley : Michael.Hartley@...
      Head, Department of Information Technology,
      Sepang Institute of Technology
      +---Q-u-o-t-a-b-l-e---Q-u-o-t-e----------------------------------
      "Often, when I am reading a good book, I stop and thank my
      teacher. That is, I used to, until she got an unlisted number."
      --Anon
    • Nathan Russell
      On Sat, 3 Nov 2001 11:26:10 +0800, MICHAEL HARTLEY ... Yves page says none through k=20; note that k=21 is reserved to be tested under the alias
      Message 2 of 3 , Nov 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sat, 3 Nov 2001 11:26:10 +0800, "MICHAEL HARTLEY"
        <Michael.Hartley@...> wrote:

        >
        >Dear All,
        >
        >Are there any primes of the form 10^(2^k)+1 known for k>1 ?
        >
        >Yours, Mike H...

        Yves' page says none through k=20; note that k=21 is reserved to be
        tested under the alias (10^2)^(2^19)

        (Unless Proth specifically avoids testing bases which are perfect
        squares, which I behavior I didn't observe with Proth 6.7).

        Nathan
      • Nathan Russell
        On Sat, 03 Nov 2001 06:25:13 +0100, Marcel Martin ... Sorry - that was a careless typo on my part. k=20 itself has already been tested twice
        Message 3 of 3 , Nov 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          On Sat, 03 Nov 2001 06:25:13 +0100, Marcel Martin <znz@...>
          wrote:

          >>Yves' page says none through k=20; note that k=21 is reserved to be
          >>tested under the alias (10^2)^(2^19)
          >
          >(10^2)^(2^19) = 10^(2^20), not 10^(2^21)
          >
          >Marcel Martin

          Sorry - that was a careless typo on my part. k=20 itself has already
          been tested twice (once by myself, in fact, unless my math is again
          off).

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