13-million-digit prime number Just amazing...
#1
Posted 2008-September-27, 18:13
How many digits will the next one have?
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#2
Posted 2008-September-28, 02:40
Hanoi5, on Sep 28 2008, 02:13 AM, said:
How many digits will the next one have?
More.
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#3
Posted 2008-September-28, 04:09
OleBerg, on Sep 28 2008, 08:40 AM, said:
Hanoi5, on Sep 28 2008, 02:13 AM, said:
How many digits will the next one have?
More.
See
http://www.mersenne.org/history.htm
The one mentioned in the OP was the one discovered on August 23. The next one they found (on September 6) had fewer digits!
#4
Posted 2008-September-28, 04:31
George Carlin
#5
Posted 2008-September-28, 05:57
#6
Posted 2008-September-28, 06:58
EricK, on Sep 28 2008, 05:09 AM, said:
OleBerg, on Sep 28 2008, 08:40 AM, said:
Hanoi5, on Sep 28 2008, 02:13 AM, said:
How many digits will the next one have?
More.
See
http://www.mersenne.org/history.htm
The one mentioned in the OP was the one discovered on August 23. The next one they found (on September 6) had fewer digits!
saw where the forumula for a Mersene prime was 2p-1
#7
Posted 2008-September-28, 07:50
#8
Posted 2008-September-28, 10:17
kenberg, on Sep 28 2008, 01:50 PM, said:
The numbers used in cryptography are many orders of magnitude smaller than these giants.
The primes are find by picking large numbers of the size you want and running "primality tests" on them until you find a prime. Note that primality testing is much faster than factorization (at least wih current methods!)
Please note however that I only know slightly more than zip about this.
#9
Posted 2008-September-29, 04:06
Quote
#10
Posted 2008-September-29, 16:58
brianshark, on Sep 29 2008, 10:06 AM, said:
Quote
Just to clarify, that should read 19,249 × 2^13,018,586 + 1
#11
Posted 2008-September-30, 05:33
Even if all of these were published it wouldn't make a difference to the strength of cyphers (well nto a significant difference) as the number of primes 1024 digits long is immense, testing them all is not a significantly easier problem than factorising the 2048 digit number in the first place.

Help
