Okay, those are HUGE factors. Have the predictions on the work eliminated by P-1 factoring been pretty much confirmed by the # of large factors found? In other words, is the extra processing time paying off?
I'd hazard a guess that the time saving is indeed appreciable, but I wonder if anyone has done some cold hard stats on it. > -----Original Message----- > From: George Woltman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 12:33 PM > To: Aaron Blosser; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Factoring top 10 > > Hi, > > At 11:41 AM 2/12/2002 -0800, Aaron Blosser wrote: > >PS - I'm just thrilled because I found a factor of an exponent that beat > >my previous record... 101 bit factor. I'm too lazy to look through the > >cleared exponents list, so does anyone know what the largest factor is > >that has been found by GIMPS lately? > > The top 10 - 39 digits for the biggest! > > 14334623 39 563796628294674772855559264041716715663 > 13187813 35 63113922700063643342764849026462401 > 10750127 34 4777866348588447235992766781311399 > 12932167 34 4314676575733979321708362055504719 > 10506347 34 2529967840093210987185485731119337 > 13459613 34 2004522251312746653413939484232703 > 14542817 34 1001733277749555116882783777187313 > 12348829 33 972299186932443166370257195895087 > 14378827 33 749393632720558083108841526201431 > 13111271 32 35439060242916356936579100907769 _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
