I am curious why someone won't do what I want

[sweety439]

Lucas(148091) is certificated to be prime in September 2015 (see prime pages), but why no one certificate Fibonacci(148091)? Fibonacci(148091) is smaller than Lucas(148091), and 148091 may be the largest n such that Fibonacci(n) and Lucas(n) are both primes.

[paulunderwood]

Originally Posted by sweety439

Lucas(148091) is certificated to be prime in September 2015 (see prime pages), but why no one certificate Fibonacci(148091)? Fibonacci(148091) is smaller than Lucas(148091), and 148091 may be the largest n such that Fibonacci(n) and Lucas(n) are both primes.

These numbers take months if not years of certification on dedicated hardware. Maybe you could invest some time and money in the endeavors to provide such proofs instead of squawking about how pitiful our hard efforts have been.

[sweety439]

I am curious that why none has reserved the Wagstaff number (2^95369+1)/3, it has only 28709 digits, much smaller than the partition number Partition(1289844341) (40000 digits), which is already reserved and proven to be prime (see http://www.ellipsa.eu/public/primo/top20.html), and Wagstaff numbers are much more important (and seems to be easier to be proven prime) than partition numbers.

[paulunderwood]

More attacks on our hard efforts! "Only 28709 digits" -- have you tried running Primo, even at 10k digits? it is O(log(n)^(4+eps)). It is not trivial to do such certifications. It is absurd to say that Wagstaff is "much more important" than a partition number. The latter has greater entropy and show off the effectiveness of ECPP. There are couple of aims here: big ECPP and proving classic top20 PRPs. We aim to do both. Please stop harping on about our efforts and start doing some Primo work.

[sweety439]

Originally Posted by paulunderwood

More attacks on our hard efforts! "Only 28709 digits" -- have you tried running Primo, even at 10k digits? it is O(log(n)^(4+eps)). It is not trivial to do such certifications. It is absurd to say that Wagstaff is "much more important" than a partition number. The latter has greater entropy and show off the effectiveness of ECPP. There are couple of aims here: big ECPP and proving classic top20 PRPs. We aim to do both. Please stop harping on about our efforts and start doing some Primo work.

I only have Windows10, and there is no Windows version for Primo.

[Batalov]

https://www.techradar.com/best/best-...chine-software
go. read.

[kar_bon]

Originally Posted by sweety439

I only have Windows10, and there is no Windows version for Primo.

You can download Primo 3.0.9 from my page running under WIN, so you get an idea, how long a certificate would take for a 'only' 5000 digit number.
Sure this version is slower than the current one, but try it.

[axn]

Option 1 - Install WSL2 inside Windows 10
Option 2 - Install a linux as dual boot.

[sweety439]

Originally Posted by kar_bon

You can download Primo 3.0.9 from my page running under WIN, so you get an idea, how long a certificate would take for a 'only' 5000 digit number.
Sure this version is slower than the current one, but try it.

I want to run these numbers to prove my Sierpinski and Riesel conjectures:

S73: (14*73^21369+1)/3 (may be too large)
S105: (191*105^5045+1)/8
S256: (11*256^5702+1)/3

R7: (197*7^181761-1)/2 and (367*7^15118-1)/6 (may be too large)
R73: (79*73^9339-1)/6
R91: (27*91^5048-1)/2
R100: (133*100^5496-1)/33
R107: (3*107^4900-1)/2

[xilman]

Originally Posted by sweety439

I want to run these numbers to prove ...

If you want to run them, please go ahead and run them. No-one will stop you.

[mathwiz]

Originally Posted by sweety439

I want to run these numbers

Then you should acquire the necessary hardware/VM and software and run it yourself. Not sure why you expect others to do it for you?