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

k.2^n+/-1 series

Expand Messages
  • robert44444uk
    Does anyone in the group know if any series of the form k.2^n+/-1 has 100+ known primes? Regards Robert Smith
    Message 1 of 12 , Apr 6 12:46 PM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Does anyone in the group know if any series of the form k.2^n+/-1 has
      100+ known primes?

      Regards

      Robert Smith
    • Jack Brennen
      ... See Carlos Rivera s web page at http://www.primepuzzles.net/puzzles/puzz_006.htm The information on that page is seriously out-of-date, but shows that 113
      Message 2 of 12 , Apr 6 1:13 PM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        robert44444uk wrote:
        >
        > Does anyone in the group know if any series of the form k.2^n+/-1 has
        > 100+ known primes?
        >

        See Carlos Rivera's web page at

        http://www.primepuzzles.net/puzzles/puzz_006.htm

        The information on that page is seriously out-of-date, but shows
        that 113 primes of the form 577294575*2^n+1 exist with n <= 33772.

        I don't have all of my logs handy, but I would guess that there
        are roughly 30 more known primes of that form discovered since
        Carlos' page was updated (all of them by me, last I checked :-)

        That would give somewhere around 140 known primes of that form.
      • p_jobling
        ... has ... Robert, The number of primes of this form up to a given n depend on the weight of k (see http://brennen.net/primes/ProthWeight.html and
        Message 3 of 12 , Apr 7 4:35 AM
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In primenumbers@y..., "robert44444uk" <100620.2351@c...> wrote:
          > Does anyone in the group know if any series of the form k.2^n+/-1
          has
          > 100+ known primes?

          Robert,

          The number of primes of this form up to a given 'n' depend on
          the 'weight' of k (see http://brennen.net/primes/ProthWeight.html and
          http://www.glasgowg43.freeserve.co.uk/nashdef.htm). And my guess is
          that a PrimoProth form would have a pretty high weight, since they
          explicitly exclude small prime factors. Here are some results from
          Jack's applet:

          [k : 577294575, w : 3.8109277425263]
          k : 3710369067405, w : 3.632228059618325
          k : 100280245065, w : 3.3005203415048
          k : 255255, w : 3.2873890549013387
          k : 3234846615, w : 3.1315263921732965
          k : 111546435, w : 2.9259932105539006
          k : 4849845, w : 2.327663281839659

          The first is Jack's 577294575, the others are 17#/2, 19#/2, etc.

          By the way, it only took about half an hour to add PrimoProths to
          NewPGen, all of the tools required were there (the verification
          routine took most of the time; to do the work only required changing
          or adding about 10 lines of code).

          Regards,

          Paul.
        • Marcin Lipinski
          By the way, it only took about half an hour to add PrimoProths to NewPGen, all of the tools required were there (the verification routine took most of the
          Message 4 of 12 , Apr 7 4:48 AM
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            By the way, it only took about half an hour to add PrimoProths to
            NewPGen, all of the tools required were there (the verification
            routine took most of the time; to do the work only required changing
            or adding about 10 lines of code).

            So when the new version of NewPGen will be available?
            Regards,

            Marcin.


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • p_jobling
            ... It should be ready for release very soon. I have been very busy with it recently - as well as the PrimoProth sieves the release also allows larger bitmaps
            Message 5 of 12 , Apr 7 5:00 AM
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In primenumbers@y..., "Marcin Lipinski" <apollo@a...> wrote:
              > So when the new version of NewPGen will be available?

              It should be ready for release very soon. I have been very busy with
              it recently - as well as the PrimoProth sieves the release also
              allows larger bitmaps (up to 485 Mb, don't ask why 485 rather than
              512 or 2Gb); much improved performance for small p; the ability to
              automatically test with PFGW once the sieving has finished; a scheme
              to improve performance for very sparse, wide ranges; a 'Hide' option;
              and the ability to use two save files so that you should never lose
              your work if the machine crashes.

              If you want to beta test it, I'll be sending the latest release
              candidate to yourself and Robert.

              Regards,

              Paul.
            • Jack Brennen
              ... I just thought I d add that the highest Proth weight for k
              Message 6 of 12 , Apr 7 9:37 AM
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Paul Jobling wrote:

                > Here are some results from Jack's applet:
                >
                > [k : 577294575, w : 3.8109277425263]
                > k : 3710369067405, w : 3.632228059618325
                > k : 100280245065, w : 3.3005203415048
                > k : 255255, w : 3.2873890549013387
                > k : 3234846615, w : 3.1315263921732965
                > k : 111546435, w : 2.9259932105539006
                > k : 4849845, w : 2.327663281839659
                >
                > The first is Jack's 577294575, the others are 17#/2, 19#/2, etc.

                I just thought I'd add that the highest Proth weight for k < 10^9
                is the amazing k = 986963835, with a weight of 4.1295...

                The reason that 577294575 has more *known* primes is that it is
                much richer in primes for low n. For n<1000, k=577294575 has
                56 primes, compared to only 43 primes in that range for k=986963835.

                Note that Chad Davis (g22) was actively searching for primes of the
                form 986963835*2^n+1 as recently as July 2001, but only up to
                n around 180332.

                I have completely searched for primes of the form 577294575*2^n+1
                up to n = 310000, and substantial partial ranges beyond that.
              • Jack Brennen
                ... This reminds me of another similar question. What value of k has the most known twin primes of the form (k*2^n-1, k*2^n+1)? I found an example of k with
                Message 7 of 12 , Apr 7 9:40 AM
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  robert44444uk wrote:
                  >
                  > Does anyone in the group know if any series of the form k.2^n+/-1 has
                  > 100+ known primes?
                  >

                  This reminds me of another similar question. What value of k has
                  the most known twin primes of the form (k*2^n-1, k*2^n+1)?

                  I found an example of k with 12 known twin prime pairs some years
                  ago, but I don't have those logs handy... I do remember that all
                  12 twin prime pairs had fairly small exponents -- I don't think
                  that n exceeded 100 for any of the twin prime pairs.
                • Nathan Russell
                  ... Just out of curiosity, are most folks in the community now using PFGW instead of PRP for Proth and K*2^N-1 candidates? I haven t compared the relative
                  Message 8 of 12 , Apr 7 10:21 AM
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    At 12:00 PM 4/7/2002 +0000, Paul Jobling wrote:
                    >--- In primenumbers@y..., "Marcin Lipinski" <apollo@a...> wrote:
                    > > So when the new version of NewPGen will be available?
                    >
                    >It should be ready for release very soon. I have been very busy with
                    >it recently - as well as the PrimoProth sieves the release also
                    >allows larger bitmaps (up to 485 Mb, don't ask why 485 rather than
                    >512 or 2Gb); much improved performance for small p; the ability to
                    >automatically test with PFGW once the sieving has finished;

                    Just out of curiosity, are most folks in the community now using PFGW
                    instead of PRP for Proth and K*2^N-1 candidates? I haven't compared the
                    relative speeds in some time, having been busy with Fermat.exe; I should
                    expect the speeds to be comparable, since both programs use George's v21
                    libraries.

                    Nathan, who would use PFGW constantly if it had the ability to minimize to
                    the system tray
                  • Michael Bell
                    ... It does, and has done for some time! Look for the Win_Dev releases, it has this ability, and can be set to restart minimized to the tray, so you can just
                    Message 9 of 12 , Apr 7 11:38 AM
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >
                      > Nathan, who would use PFGW constantly if it had the ability to minimize to
                      > the system tray
                      >

                      It does, and has done for some time! Look for the Win_Dev releases, it has
                      this ability, and can be set to restart minimized to the tray, so you can
                      just dump it and a range on a computer and put a shortcut in the StartUp
                      folder and your done.

                      On the k.2^n+/-1 numbers PFGW has a considerable advantage over Proth.exe I
                      believe; Proth is now mainly for generalised Fermat's only.

                      Michael.
                    • jim_fougeron
                      ... with ... PFGW ... compared the ... should ... George s v21 ... minimize to ... It has had that ability for about a year now Nathan. It is called
                      Message 10 of 12 , Apr 7 11:59 AM
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In primenumbers@y..., Nathan Russell <nrussell@a...> wrote:
                        > At 12:00 PM 4/7/2002 +0000, Paul Jobling wrote:
                        > >--- In primenumbers@y..., "Marcin Lipinski" <apollo@a...> wrote:
                        > > > So when the new version of NewPGen will be available?
                        > >
                        > >It should be ready for release very soon. I have been very busy
                        with
                        > >it recently - as well as the PrimoProth sieves the release also
                        > >allows larger bitmaps (up to 485 Mb, don't ask why 485 rather than
                        > >512 or 2Gb); much improved performance for small p; the ability to
                        > >automatically test with PFGW once the sieving has finished;
                        >
                        > Just out of curiosity, are most folks in the community now using
                        PFGW
                        > instead of PRP for Proth and K*2^N-1 candidates? I haven't
                        compared the
                        > relative speeds in some time, having been busy with Fermat.exe; I
                        should
                        > expect the speeds to be comparable, since both programs use
                        George's v21
                        > libraries.
                        >
                        > Nathan, who would use PFGW constantly if it had the ability to
                        minimize to
                        > the system tray

                        It has had that ability for about a year now Nathan. It is called
                        WinPFGW.exe. BTW, there was a new dev release done just today, which
                        is the first public release with the v22 Woltman libs. This release
                        can be found in the Yahoo groups "primeform" files folder.

                        Jim.
                      • jbrennen
                        ... Following up to my previous message: k == 202507305 == 3.5.7.11.13.13487 (k*2^n-1, k*2^n+1) are both prime for these n: 2, 12, 17, 28, 31, 33 42, 55, 62,
                        Message 11 of 12 , Apr 8 11:56 AM
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In primenumbers@y..., Jack Brennen <jack@b...> wrote:
                          > I found an example of k with 12 known twin prime pairs some years
                          > ago, but I don't have those logs handy... I do remember that all
                          > 12 twin prime pairs had fairly small exponents -- I don't think
                          > that n exceeded 100 for any of the twin prime pairs.

                          Following up to my previous message:

                          k == 202507305 == 3.5.7.11.13.13487

                          (k*2^n-1, k*2^n+1) are both prime for these n:

                          2, 12, 17, 28, 31, 33
                          42, 55, 62, 86, 89, 91


                          [and probably for no other values of n...]
                        • Barbara and Joe
                          A belated reply here, but check my webpage www.glasgowg43.freeserve.co.uk/nashprim.htm for straightforwardly-generated numbers with very high Proth weight - in
                          Message 12 of 12 , May 3, 2002
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            A belated reply here, but check my webpage www.glasgowg43.freeserve.co.uk/nashprim.htm
                            for straightforwardly-generated numbers with very high Proth weight - in the equivalent context of Nash weight.

                            In terms of searching through those in the webage, some of the k-values are already taken, including:

                            986963835
                            302627325
                            302442855
                            806586495

                            (the last by me). There will be plenty of others available which should provide large numbers of small primes of the form k*2^n+1.

                            If you want to know more about the divisibility properties of these numbers, then go to
                            www.glasgowg43.freeserve.co.uk/pfaq6.htm

                            Joe.

                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: robert44444uk <100620.2351@...>
                            To: primenumbers@yahoogroups.com <primenumbers@yahoogroups.com>
                            Date: 08 April 2002 02:33
                            Subject: [PrimeNumbers] Re: k.2^n+/-1 series


                            On the question of proth weights for k, the highest I found to date
                            is for 39.37#+2.31#+20.29# (289939302102450) which has a weight of
                            4.216. I'm sure there are higher values than this.

                            I am not 100% convinced by the proth weight concept. I ran this
                            number up to n= circa 3,200 both plus and minus one, and got 43 and
                            31 primes, which seems pretty average to me. As a comparison,
                            67#.2^n+1 plus yielded 70 primes up to n=3,300, (and 88 up to
                            n=18,000) with a proth weight of (only) 4.191

                            That said, Jack's applet is an interesting tool and I use it!

                            Carlos Rivera has rejected 23#.2^n-1 as the most populous -1 series,
                            (95 primes) because it has an index p/ln(n) of 8.00, compared to
                            Jack's record of 9.083. It seems you must beat not only the absolute
                            number of primes, but also the index to get a listing for puzzle 6
                            (see http://www.primepuzzles.net/puzzles/puzz_006.htm)

                            On processing speed - on my machine, PRP and pfgw are about the same.

                            Regards

                            Robert Smith




                            Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                            ADVERTISEMENT




                            Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-unsubscribe@egroups.com
                            The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org



                            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.