@ParamanandSingh If you look at the comments, notwithstanding the spirituality (this user must have attended some meditation session and come!) , the user is basically asking how does one verify the digits of pi. "What's the basis of comparison?" I think the answer is just the proof that the y-cruncher (which a program that generates the digits of pi) works?
@TeresaLisbon Maybe the user does not trust the supercomputers that calculated more than $10^{15}$ digits (do not know the exact amount). To be honest, I have doubts about this precision as well. If one calculates , lets say , $10^{10}$ digits, we must trust some source with this precision (if there are at least two independent calculations, this would probably be enough). That said, I am guessing.
@Peter Sorry for being a little off topic, but I'd like to join the Smarandache prime number search. I did not find the GMP-ECM link in Martin Hopf's room, although I read the recent chat messages and did a Ctrl-F find operation of GMP-ECM. Is there a website where I can get the code? I'd like to imagine it would be compatible with my system.
(Side note : I know the basics of the Elliptic curve factorization, there was a Java applet of Dario Alejandro Alpern that I used like 11 years ago, so I knew it all the way back in school then!)
And, back to being on topic, the user is going to repost this again, I'm pretty sure, so we are going to have to be watchful.
@TeresaLisbon I have problems with GMP-ECM on my computer as well, weirdly yafu (using GMP-ECM) however runs perfecly. Today I found a compliacted expression with which I can use yafu ! Which windows version do you have ?
@Peter Ok, so the point is that it's known up to a large index that every Smarandache number is prime, so you are finding patterns in the smallest prime factors of these numbers?
I would like to find a pattern of the smallest prime factors, but I think there is none (apart from very small factors). No Smarandache prime is known and if one exist , it must have at least roughly 2 million digits.
Of course, we would be happy to have another helper ! Upto $10^4$, there are still $74$ cases without a known factor.
@MartinR While I agree that this is a duplicate, I think that it is better to close such questions for lacking context, and providing a link to the asker. Duplicate closures are, I think, better reserved for questions which meet the quality standards of the site, but which happen to have already been answered.
@MartinR Just to be clear, I really appreciate you posting the link to a duplicate question---the asker still has access to the answer, which is (hopefully) helpful to them.
@Peter (cc @amWhy; cc the rest of the room) When a user signs up for an account here, they affirm that they are over the age of 13. If you encounter someone under this age, it would be helpful if you raised a flag (you are, of course, not obliged to do so, but it would be helpful). Thanks.
@XanderHenderson When the user mentioned 8th grade, I assumed they were thirteen. My friends, when they entered 8th grade, were all 13 years old. So I did not see a reason to flag, despite some commenter associating 8th grade with 12 years old.
In any event, no one is gonna get in trouble for not raising a flag. But if you see something, a flag is appreciate (and if you don't see it, I guess you can't raise a flag). :D
