Re: Q:About primes?


Michael Harrington wrote:
> "Dan" <30pack@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:13663801.1136497130495.JavaMail.jakarta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Q:About primes?
> >
> > Why does a certain large prime require much more
> > processing time to verify its primality than one that
> > is more than 60 times its size?

> >
> > Both verified as primes under the APRT-CLE process.
> >
> > Dan
> Consider P an odd number, hence a prime candidate.
> A typical "Prime Testing Algorithm" is if ..base^(P-1) mod P = 1
> is true using 4 different bases (say 2,3,5,7) then P is "probably prime"
> The trick to handling such monsters is to repeatedly divide (P-1) by
> the number 2 until the number 1 is all that is left. Using decimal
> arithmetic
> it takes roughly 4 times 751 =3004 (your second candidate) steps to do
> this.


Once again, someone who knows nothing about a subject decides to spout
nonsense. Or perhaps you can't READ????

The poster EXPLICITLY said that he used the APRT test.

So why are you dragging in blithering irrelevencies about probable
prime tests?
And your statement

"repeatedly divide (P-1) by
> the number 2 until the number 1 is all that is left. "

Is total nonsense.

Do us all a favor. Go study this subject before making further idiotic
pronouncements.

.

Quantcast