« first day (60 days earlier)      last day (44 days later) » 

3:32 PM
@Peter apparently Enzo Creti has been banned from chat too
i didn't understand this
Jun 11 at 18:18, by Peter
Conjecture 6) can be proven by considering $$\sum_{j=1}^8 j!\equiv 0\mod 9$$
 
4:02 PM
@Mathphile That is hard to understand :(
I mean Enzo Creti
Apparently, you meant my claim.
Since $j!$ is obviously divisible by $9$ if $j\ge 9$ , we have that $$\sum_{j=1}^n j!$$ is divisible by $9$ for $n\ge 8$ and is obviously greater than $9$, hence cannot be a semiprime
 
ahh
 
Not too difficult , right ?
 
yes
 
Can you check some numbers for primality and/or factor some numbers ?
 
yes
sure
 
4:09 PM
Is the generalized Fermat-number $$14^{2^{19}}+1$$ prime ?
Is the generalized Fermat-number $$12^{2^{20}}+1$$ prime ?
And finally, something that should take a week according to a user of this site : Is the generalized Fermat-number $$10^{2^{24}}+1$$ prime ?
 
should i use pari?
 
pfgw is much faster
 
okay
 
You do not need a text-file
Just input -q14^(2^19)+1
for example
 
okay
 
4:13 PM
and for factorizations, yafu would be good. Do you have yafu ?
 
no
 
I can also give you pari-routines. Takes a moment, in the mean-time you can enter a number in pfgw
 
started pfgw program for $14^{2^{19}}+1$
 
Great! Should not take too long, I expect "composite" anyway, but le's see ...
z=prod(j=1,25,prime(j));m=16;b=14;n=2^(m+1);p=n+1;while(Mod(b,p)^(2^m)<>-1,p=p+n;while(gcd(p,z)<>1,p=p+n);if(Mod(p,10^7)==1,print(p," ",length(digits(p)))));print(p," ",length(digits(p))," ",isprime(p,2))
This is for pari to search a factor of $$14^{2^{16}}+1$$
 
Enzo Creti has been banned from chat for 319 days :(
 
4:19 PM
What a site ...
 
30720000001 11
40960000001 11
92160000001 11
194560000001 12
215040000001 12
245760000001 12
256000000001 12
276480000001 12
307200000001 12
317440000001 12
399360000001 12
output of pari program
 
yes, I display the progress
A week for a 16-million digit number ? Would be a good performance for pfgw. Maybe, the user I mentioned tests the number now.
 
@peter do you think there exists some integer $k$, for which no semipime of the form $n^n+k$ exists?
 
If I remember right, for some k it can even be proven. I have k = 125 in mind, but I am not quite sure.
Let us see : If $n$ is odd , $n^n+125$ is even
 
i remember $n^n+8$ was a non trivial example for which $n^n+k$ was never prime
i would like to find a similar example for semiprimes
 
4:27 PM
If $n$ is divisible by 3, we have the sum of two cubes, but $x^3+y^3=(x+y)(x^2-xy+y^2)$
If $n$ is even and not divisible by $3$ , then $n^n+125$ is divisble by $3$
In fact, $n^n+8$ is conjectured to be never prime (OEIS)
For semiprimes , things are more difficult. We should first search for examples with a small prime factor, they are easy to check for semiprimality.
Composite numbers without a small factor are hard to check, but have a reasonable chance to be semiprime.
Do you think that someone checked $$10^{2^{24}}+1$$ and/or $$10^{2^{25}}+1$$ already ?
@Mathphile
 
@Peter okay
@Peter it is possible
shouldn't take more than 3 days with a powerful pc
can pfgw check for semiprimes?
 
The second number should take a month according to the user.
 
with a single core computer right?
 
yes, but here we cannot parallelize
 
with pfgw?
 
4:41 PM
I do not know pfgw deep enough. There could be an option to search for factors. Primality tests cannot be parallelized , in contrary to factorizations.
 
is there a reason why primality tests cannot be parallelized?
 
We would need the intermediate values, but we would have to calculate them. Only, if we have a value, we can calculate the next.
Of course, I mean a single rabin-miller-test. If we use several bases, we can of course parallelize.
But a single test - I do not see a possibility.
 
i don't know in depth about these primality tests to understand why we can't parallelize
 
the idea is simple : We check whether $b^{n-1}\equiv 1\mod n$ holds, only if it does, it makes sense to continue because otherwise, we know already that n must be composite. (Assuming that $b$ and $n$ are coprime)
This is what pfgw usually does. This is usually the start of a primality test.
And in this test, we use repeated squaring , but we have to calculate the values one after another.
 
@Peter ahh
 
4:49 PM
If we could parallelize, I guess we would know much larger primes already.
 
yes much larger
this also explains why we can't use gpus
as gpus use thousands of cores for calculations
 
Robert Frost began with the verification of a "super-Mersenne-number". I do not know whether the program still runs. He estimated to need 3 years. The number, if prime, would be a new record.
 
what is that mersenne number?
 
I do not remember the exponent, but it was huge, the resulting number has more than $10^8$ digits.
 
so is it a prp for now?
 
4:53 PM
No, there is no "pre-test". But you are right that the test with pfgw would NOT prove primality.
I searched for a factor and found none, nevertheless the odds are clearly for the compositeness.
It would perhaps be more clever to begin with the Lucas-Lehmer-test
This test is rigorous , but only applies to Mersenne numbers.
 
yes
 
How far is pfgw ? And pari ?
 
PFGW: PRP: 14^(2^19)+1 930000/1996150
 
nearly half-time !
 
PARI: 558776320000001 15
558796800000001 15
558858240000001 15
558888960000001 15
558919680000001 15
558950400000001 15
 
4:58 PM
Do you still have a window free ?
 
yes
is there an "else" command in pari?
 
OK, then run also :
z=prod(j=1,25,prime(j));m=15;b=18;n=2^(m+1);p=n+1;while(Mod(b,p)^(2^m)<>-1,p=p+n;while(gcd(p,z)<>1,p=p+n);if(Mod(p,10^7)==1,print(p," ",length(digits(p)))));print(p," ",length(digits(p))," ",isprime(p,2))
 
okay
 
Good question with the "else". I do not know it.
If pfgw has finished, please copy the complete output.
@Mathphile
 
okay
hasn't finished yet
@peter since i don't have any more windows left can you run this?
a=0; for(k=1, 10^4,b=0; for(n=1, 30, if(bigomega(n^n+k)==2, b=1; print([n, k, a]))); if(b==0, a=a+1))
made small edit in code just now
3726080000001 14
23746560000001 14
23756800000001 14
23761920000001 14
23838720000001 14
23848960000001 14
23854080000001 14
23871395463169 14 1
@peter
<(Mod(p,10^7)==1,print(p," ",length(digits(p)))));print(p," ",length(digits(p))," ",isprime(p,2))
30720000001 11
40960000001 11
56320000001 11
76800000001 11
87040000001 11
92160000001 11
107520000001 12
138240000001 12
194560000001 12
215040000001 12
230400000001 12
240640000001 12
245760000001 12
256000000001 12
276480000001 12
307200000001 12
317440000001 12
353280000001 12
384000000001 12
394240000001 12
399360000001 12
409600000001 12
414720000001 12
424960000001 12
445440000001 12
455680000001 12
@peter you there?
 
5:44 PM
I am back ! Great ! You found a factor !
 
yes
also is there a reason why $n^n \pm 100$ is never semiprime?
@Peter?
 
Let us see, $n$ even is obvious, number divisible by $4$
but for odd n, I do not see how we can rule out a semiprime.
How far did you check ?
 
range not completed
 
I can search in factordb ...
$11^{11}-100$ is semiprime.
also $21^{21}-100$
for "+" I did not find a semiprime yet.
 
6:01 PM
okay
 
pfgw should have finished ...
 
yes
14^(2^19)+1 is composite: RES64: [07B9B527719D28DA] (6002.0163s+0.0125s)
Done.
 
FF 398 (show) 177^177+100<398> = 269 · 2894115545...13<396>
Probably a semiprime
You can run the next primality check, will take a bit longer ...
-q12^(2^20)+1
 
okay
 
The other pari still running ?
 
6:14 PM
yes
 
$177^{177}+100$ actually semiprime !
 
yes just checked
 
cofactor proven prime
 
list of $k$ for which there may be no semiprime $n^n+k$
100, 196, 346, 573, 604, 769, 779, 819, 857, 923, 937, 940, 1022, 1121, 1128, 1151, 1152, 1169
 
OK, so for the other k upto this limit you found a semiprime, right ?
 
6:21 PM
yes for upto $n=30$
 
We can also remove 100 from the list
 
this is the routine i wrote: a=0; for(k=1, 10^4,b=0; for(n=1, 30, if(bigomega(n^n+k)==2, b=1; print([n, k, a]))); if(b==0, a=a+1))
yes we can remove 100
 
Does this routine output or store the holes ?
FF 59 (show) 37^37+196<59> = 66347 · 1590898602...79<54>
You can remove 196
 
@Peter it outputs everything except the holes
for $n^n-k :$
25, 45, 46, 56, 64, 81, 107, 157, 211, 216, 225, 288, 295, 301, 304, 342, 349, 351, 361, 386
 
FF 65 (show) 40^40+346<65> = 2 · 6044629098...73<64>
You can also remove 346
FF 92 (show) 53^53+573<92> = 2 · 1217842408...73<92>
and also 573
FF 83 (show) 49^49+604<83> = 215417 · 3064276481...09<78>
and also 604
but 769 seems to be a "hard case"
 
6:40 PM
the first one till now
769 is also prime
 
yes
@user11689202 Hi
 
@Peter i posted a question about one of the earlier conjectures too:
1
Q: Are there no semiprimes of the form $n^n+n!$, where $n \gt 7$?

MathphileI searched for semiprimes of the form of $n^n+n!$, where $n \in \Bbb{N}$, for a range of $n \le 2 \times 10^4$ on PARI/GP and found semiprimes of the form $n^n+n!$ only for $n=2, 3, 7$. We can write $n^n+n!$ as: $$n^n+n!=n(n^{n-1}+(n-1)!)$$ Therefore we can also alternatively look for primes of ...

 
7:09 PM
According to my calculations , the first candidate for $n^n+769$ to be semiprime is $n=682$
 
is it confirmed semiprime?
 
it is only a possible semiprime. I know no factor
How far is pfgw ?
 
592500/3759105
 
15,8 % done
 
is it possible to factor $682^682+769$ with current computing power?
 
7:17 PM
1933 digits, I do not know whether this can in general be done. I think, it is still within reach if many computers work together. With some luck, "small" factors are found and the factorization can be completed.
What do you think ? Which number of digits for RSA will be safe forever ?
If we ignore other attacks than just factoring
 
617 digits should be safe for a long time
 
So low ? I thought even 1000 digits would not be safe anymore.
Let us assume that all computers in the world in , lets say, 100 years , work together.
For which number of digits would they need more than 100 years ?
@Mathphile
 
i think 1500 digits might take a 100 more years
 
So, you belive that 1 500 will be safe within our lifetime ?
 
apparently RSA 2048 (617 digits) has a $200,000 prize
@Peter yes
 
7:29 PM
And it was not broken yet ?
 
not till now
 
So, we "only" need to factor this number to become rich. Let us begin :) (I am kidding)
 
lol
 
So the claims that 3 000 bytes are not enough are from cranks ?
 
i think many people still believe that quantum computers will be usable in the near future
 
7:33 PM
In this case, we would see whether the Shor algorithm actually works (which I doubt)
 
apparently 232 digits is the longest factored RSA number
@Peter it does work but would need a lot of qubits of computing power
@Peter maybe try yafu to find a small factor of $682^682+769$
 
I have never understood how this algorithm should work at all. Perhaps , it is based on assumed quantum phenomens that do not actually exist. And I do not mean the effects making a quantum computer possible.
I already run yafu
50 11k-curves passed
 
@Peter quantum mechanics is weird
 
Exactly. Peter Ripota is convinced that quantum computers are impossible but of course he can be wrong.
 
$n^n-25$ also seems to be a hard case
 
7:39 PM
But let us say, quantum computers will not appear. Do we have a chance to factor 617-digit numbers ?
 
well we will reach there some time in the future
but it will take a long time
$n^n-k$ seems to have a lot of holes
 
FF 81 (show) 48^48-25<81> = 22376373215145016417253120871498164207611<41> · 22376373215145016417253120871498164207621<41>
 
25, 45, 46, 56, 64, 81, 107, 157, 211, 216, 225, 288, 295, 301, 304, 342, 349, 351, 361, 386
 
difference of two squares, factoriozation trivial, both factors prime.
 
@Peter ah yes
 
7:43 PM
FF 61 (show) 38^38-45<61> = 919 · 1170741895...61<58>
and this solve -45
FF 55 (show) 35^35-46<55> = 27824063 · 39624245364674048357056495789759689236145799283<47>
and this one -46
FF 71 (show) 43^43-56<71> = 13 · 1334136412...27<70>
and this one -56
$n^n-64$ could be a hard case, but it is the difference of two squares if n is even
But then, it cannot be a semiprime ...
 
hmm
i wonder if there exists some non-trivial form which is never semiprime
 
FF 293 (show) 137^137-64<293> = 52638583 · 1021912027...91<286>
this solves -64
769 is a candidate
 
yes
but i am very doubtful about it
@Peter do you believe such a form exists?
 
Since $n^n$ grows quite fast, there should be a form, even a nontrivial one.
 
7:58 PM
if am also searching $n^{n^2} \pm k$ on pari but the program is running very slow
 
-81 could be a hard case as well
although it is the difference of two squares if n is even
 
yes
1
Q: Are there no semiprimes of the form $n^n+n!$, where $n \gt 7$?

MathphileI searched for semiprimes of the form of $n^n+n!$, where $n \in \Bbb{N}$, for a range of $n \le 2 \times 10^4$ on PARI/GP and found semiprimes of the form $n^n+n!$ only for $n=2, 3, 7$. We can write $n^n+n!$ as: $$n^n+n!=n(n^{n-1}+(n-1)!)$$ Therefore we can also alternatively look for primes of ...

@Peter do you think a big counterexample exists for this?
 
Hard to say, but the growth rate should be small enough that there is such a prime. But it can be huge.
>> ecm(682^682+769,619)

ecm: 109/619 curves on C1933 input, at B1 = 11K, B2 = gmp-ecm default
where did the running pari-program arrive ?
@Mathphile
 
1147500/3759105
@Peter i think Enzo Creti may have been IP banned meaning that if he makes another account it will be auto banned
 
8:14 PM
30,5 % . This is pfgw, and pari ?
 
3352473600000001 16
3352504320000001 16
3352606720000001 16
 
@Mathphile This is probably the sad truth
What were the parameters here ? 16/14 ?
 
i don't know how to check the parameters
 
OK, you cannot see the code, right ?
 
yes
 
8:19 PM
I think, it is 16/14
 
we could use another site like Discord to make a chat room where we could discuss with Enzo Creti
but i don't think we have any way of informing him about that now
 
Maybe he is in math overflow or in the mersenne forum
 
do you know his email?
 
no
he should be still active in the mersenne forum. Register there, then you may be able to contact him.
 
okay
@Peter it is getting late for me
see you tomorrow
gn
pfgw: 1325000/3759105
 

« first day (60 days earlier)      last day (44 days later) »