At 08:51 PM 9/19/99 -0400, you wrote:
>prime, unless we find a factor. Interestingly enough, when we find the next
>Mersenne prime, searching for a factor of M(M(p)) might allow us to find an
>even bigger prime. If for example, 6*M(p)+1 divides M(M(p)), then it must
>be prime!
Which one must be prime? 6*M(p)+1, or M(M(p))?
And why? Enquiring minds, and all.... Thanks!
>Wait, that might just be the reason to search! Will only searched up to
>k=4 for M(M(6972593)), but if 2*k*M(p)+1 divides M(M(p)), then you've just
>beaten the world record! Non-Mersenne's might once again grace the top
>10 list!
An interesting concept -- what sort of time factor would it take to prove
such a thing with an average computer?
_________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
