Re: The "little dead man" theorem
- From: Jeremy Boden <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 23:54:18 +0100
On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 13:26 -0700, vincent64@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
JeffCameron wrote:Definitely the latter.
Hmm... that is interesting. Do you think that finding the zeros will
be easy to do? I expect that trying to find the zeros of g will turn
out to be equivalent to some known unsolved problem.
Jeff Cameron
Maybe there is an iterative algorithm that, given a seed or starting
point x, would be able to find the prime number (that is root of g(z))
closest to x. The algorithm might no be practical to find all primes,
but possibly of some use to identify very large primes.
The question is, would it be more efficient to factor 10**20
consecutive numbers near 10**23 to (maybe!) identify a prime near
10**23, or use the iterative algorithm in question with seed = 10**23.
You could just use trial division on oodles of numbers near 10^23.
It would take a little while.
Alternatively, there a number of existing algorithms which will
determine primality for numbers of the order of 10^23 rather swiftly.
10^23 is not considered "large".
--
Jeremy Boden
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The "little dead man" theorem
- From: vincent64
- Re: The "little dead man" theorem
- References:
- The "little dead man" theorem
- From: vincent64
- Re: The "little dead man" theorem
- From: JeffCameron
- Re: The "little dead man" theorem
- From: vincent64
- The "little dead man" theorem
- Prev by Date: Re: one question about curve fitting
- Next by Date: Re: Justice For Pluto
- Previous by thread: Re: The "little dead man" theorem
- Next by thread: Re: The "little dead man" theorem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|