Personally, since I'm more of a dreamer, than a mathematition (I can't even
spell it) SETI@home interests me more than GIMPS....but I'm going to stick
to GIMPs for now for a few reasons..
The Program....a constantly running idle priority program is nicer than a
screensaver IMHO...
I've already started with GIMPs...and I'm around rank 440, and proud of
that high ranking, and kind of like the friendly competition.
The simplicity of the goal...GIMPS searches for large primes...SETI
searches for radio signals which may or may not be from earth, which may or
may not be natural, which may or may not may make any sense....
However...on the other hand, if SETI finds something (by something, I mean
a clearly repeating radio transmission that can only be alien in origin),
we can know that there is other intelligent life out there. I know that
it's out there, but we haven't yet found it, but proof of my belief would
be nice... Although I don't see any immediate pratical purpose to mersenne
primes...but like I said before, my interest and knowledge in math isn't
very large.
--Peter
At 10:45 05/16/1999 -0700, you wrote:
>Spike Jones wrote: ...What if... SETI@home does manage to find ET...
>
>There is yet another way to look at this. From reading the GIMPS
>posts on SETI, it is clear that many are seeing SETI as a competitor
>for idle CPUs. Yes, it is that, in a sense. I see that SETI@home is
>getting nearly as much CPU time as GIMPS, and it is only in its fourth
>full day. (Demonstrates the power of publicity). However, if we view
>SETI@home, not as a competing sibling but rather as a robust
>offspring, then perhaps it is not so bitter. I still think GIMPS will
>be the winner in the long run, for many new CPU idlers will sign
>on to SETI, realize the power of distributed computing, and many
>will perhaps land in GIMPS. Sure will will lose a few GIMPSers
>to SETI@home, but perhaps we will gain many.
>
>I see arguments for why there cannot be ETs, and other arguments
>for why they *must* be there, but in fact no one knows. Is not this
>the nature of scientific investigation, to find out? And GIMPS? As
>we say in my business, one test is worth a thousand expert opinions.
>
>Secondly, since I am on the topic of dynamic optimism, consider what
>we are doing whenever we get the result "2^yakkityyak-1 is not prime."
>So, we have found nothing, right? NO! We have discovered
>*another* Mersenne composite! One that was unknown before.
>This process cannot be shortcut; the only way to know for sure
>if a Mersenne number is composite is to test it.
>
>So, look on the bright side, my mathematical friends. We are mapping
>the mathematical landscape every time we discover a new Mersenne
>composite, even if they are as common as grains of sand on the
>beach. Of course we want to find the diamonds, but to do so
>requires sifting the sand. When we map this landscape, it is the
>same for all time and all the universe. SETI@home is making a
>map of sorts too. Let us wish them well and continue. spike
>
>________________________________________________________________
>Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
>
________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
