7-million digit prime number discovered

Monique · Jun 4, 2004

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99995057

The time it took to calculate? 14 days, the reward? $100,000
now the wait is on for a 10-/100-million/1-billion digit prime number

Pattielli · Jun 4, 2004

Viva ! Shoeless Jamie Joes !

FlatlineLemon · Jun 5, 2004

i would have thought that was about goldbachs conjecture. but interesting none the less

Gokul43201 · Jun 5, 2004

FlatlineLemon said:

i would have thought that was about goldbachs conjecture. but interesting none the less

That's a millenium problem. It's worth much more than just a bunch of prize money.

Gokul43201 · Jun 5, 2004

My high school biology teacher always insisted that we say/write "cell duplication" and never "cell division".

Biology is the only science in which multiplication means the same thing as division.

MathematicalPhysicist · Jun 6, 2004

Gokul43201 said:

My high school biology teacher always insisted that we say/write "cell duplication" and never "cell division".

Biology is the only science in which multiplication means the same thing as division.

trying to tease monique? :surprise:

nickdanger · Jul 5, 2004

Monique said:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99995057

The time it took to calculate? 14 days, the reward? $100,000
now the wait is on for a 10-/100-million/1-billion digit prime number

I am in quantum physics (just trying to let you know my deficiencies), but I am following the Mersenne Prime search and have read a little about the Prime Number Theorem. Can you tell me the following?:

I've noticed the Prime Number Theorem effort seems entirely on the proof of how many primes below a certain number. But it seems to me the objective should be the prime solution (equation) for all primes and then the number of primes below a given number would be an outcome of a so-called "Prime Solution".

Do I have this backward? Is it too hard to get the Prime Solution directly so everyone is focused on the Prime Number Theorem. I am so glad you made this post. I was about to create my own from my current and complete confusion.

Muzza · Jul 5, 2004

I've noticed the Prime Number Theorem effort seems entirely on the proof of how many primes below a certain number. But it seems to me the objective should be the prime solution (equation) for all primes and then the number of primes below a given number would be an outcome of a so-called "Prime Solution".

Come again?

What "prime number theorem effort" (AFAIK, the prime number theorem has been proven. I'm not even sure how the prime number theorem relates to this topic, which seems to be mostly about primality testing and factoring integers)? What is "the" prime solution?

nickdanger · Jul 5, 2004

Clearly then, I am indeed off-track. However, I was responding to the initial entry of this thread from Monique - the latest Mersene prime. My understanding is that each new prime is found by iteration...every computer involved takes the next possible Mersenne prime and tests its primality. So I assumed that there must not be an equation for generating the primes in a simple way aside from an iterative method. But I can not find any reference to this. Therefore I was wondering, is there a prime solution or theoretical effort in this area? I am quite possibly still on the wrong track...can you help me?

1+1=1 · Jul 5, 2004

i think to my knowledge that the largest twin primes known to date are 33218925*2^169690 +-1. (that is 51090 digits)!

muzza i think you are referring to the prime number theorem? or are you making a reference to the infinitude of primes theorem? they are much different, and give you information on primes, but is that needed to talk about this mersenne prime discovery?

matt grime · Jul 5, 2004

There are formulae involving many variables whose positive values are exactly the primes. They are too convoluted and take too long to use to be of any use (given a set of input values, you have no a priori reason for expecting the output to be positive). Not all primes are Mersenne anyway (obviously almost none are going to be mersenne, in some sense). You are still misusing the word solution, and no there is obviously no (known) pattern in the Mersenne numbers that tells you which will be the prime ones.

Muzza · Jul 5, 2004

muzza i think you are referring to the prime number theorem?

Uh, yes, when I say "prime number theorem", I do mean the "prime number theorem".

or are you making a reference to the infinitude of primes theorem? they are much different, and give you information on primes, but is that needed to talk about this mersenne prime discovery?

I'll be damned if I know, I was asking the exact same question ;)

7-million digit prime number discovered

Similar threads

Hot Threads

I How to show ##p(x)=g(x)x\pm 1\in\Bbb{Q}[x]## is irreducible in ##\Bbb{Q}_{\Bbb{Z}}[x]##?

A Question about ##FG## modules

I Showing ##k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]/\mathfrak{a}## is finite dimensional

A Near-Rings with Noncommutative Addition and Two-Sided Distributivity

I How do we distinguish two different notations for cokernel and coimage?

Recent Insights

Insights Quantum Entanglement is a Kinematic Fact, not a Dynamical Effect

Insights What Exactly is Dirac’s Delta Function? - Insight

Insights Relativator (Circular Slide-Rule): Simulated with Desmos - Insight

Insights Fixing Things Which Can Go Wrong With Complex Numbers

Insights Fermat's Last Theorem

Insights Why Vector Spaces Explain The World: A Historical Perspective