Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

40th Mersenne Prime Found

michael posted more than 9 years ago | from the primal-urges dept.

Science 99

FenwayFrank writes "A release from New Scientist announces that the Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search found another one: 2^20996011 - 1 is prime. Weighing in at 6,320,430 digits (6 megabytes of prime number...), it becomes the world's largest. Slashdot readers may remember then announcement of the 39th Mersenne Prime, a mere 3.5 million digits."

cancel ×

99 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fraud (5, Funny)

addaon (41825) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613311)

The last digit is a four!

Wait, no, it just got slashdotted before it fully loaded...

Re:Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613658)

The last digit is a 1!

Re:Fraud (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614193)

Actually, it's a 7.

2^1-1 mod 10 = 1
2^2-1 mod 10 = 3
2^3-1 mod 10 = 7
2^4-1 mod 10 = 5
2^5-1 mod 10 = 1
2^6-1 mod 10 = 3
2^7-1 mod 10 = 7
2^8-1 mod 10 = 5
etc.

20996011 mod 4 = 3 so it's a 7.

interesting (2, Funny)

nocomment (239368) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614283)

Re:interesting (1)

fatphil (181876) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615358)

Holy cow, I can't believe anyone remembers that now!
-tugs forelock-

While I'm here I must show due respect to GIMPS for harnessing hundreds of
thousands of PCs and bulldozing so convincingly through these ranges.

Phil

Re:interesting (1)

arvindn (542080) | more than 10 years ago | (#7619480)

Holy cow, I can't believe anyone remembers that now!

Sure we do! [wikipedia.org]

BTW, Remember me? :)

SLASHDOT!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613322)

6 megabytes * 10000+ views = death to site

Finally! (4, Funny)

Rick the Red (307103) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613504)

Now I can generate a secure PGP key pair!

Efficient factoring algorithm (1)

Peter Millerchip (166655) | more than 10 years ago | (#7619548)

I think you'll find that factoring the product of two huge primes becomes slightly easier when the attacker knows one of the primes!

Re:Finally! (1)

SamSim (630795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7635240)

Um, not really THAT secure. The whole number (along with the previous best known prime, M39, at "only" 4,000,000 digits, which you'd presumably also be using) is there for anybody to download.

Re:Finally! (1)

Chris_Jefferson (581445) | more than 10 years ago | (#7637778)

Actually, your PGP key would be one of the most insecure :) PGP's strength requires on factoring two primes multiplied together. However we only know one prime this big, so if you key is bigger than this prime, we have a fairly good idea what one of the factors is!

ObTiredOldJoke (0, Redundant)

dacarr (562277) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613337)

Imagine the beowulf cluster it took to calculate this!

Here's something stupid to do. (5, Funny)

satanami69 (209636) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613351)

I found my /. ID (209636) shows up 5 times.

I wonder who has the most occurrences.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613368)

Those with the fewest digits I'm sure.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (3, Insightful)

infornogr (603568) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613386)

Statistically, whoever has the forum ID with the lower number of digits. Somehow I think the nine people that would have to duke it out to answer your question won't respond to this post, however.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613393)

I'd guess malda, with UID 1. Maybe if there are other accounts with UID 2-9 that are still active, they might have a chance. :)

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613572)

malda (161250)? [slashdot.org]

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

KDan (90353) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613711)

No. This one [slashdot.org] .

Daniel

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

dacarr (562277) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613491)

Eight occurances for me. Film at eleven.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

dacarr (562277) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613520)

Or rather, if I have a dumbass attack and do '562227'. It's really like 3 or 4.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613695)

11 occurrences of my /. ID, one occurrence of my ICQ number, and fortunately, my Social Security number isn't in there.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7613866)

Due to the line breaks in the text file, searching for something in the number may not find all of the results (unless you've taken measures to counteract this).

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

PhuCknuT (1703) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614168)

597 occurances. booyah.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

BhAaD (692949) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614328)

BhAaD: 692949 -----6 Times I beat you...ha!

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (1)

Naikrovek (667) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615757)

mine shows up at least 6133 times:
c:\>cat prime6.txt | grep 667 | wc -l
6133
c:\>
more, if there are multiple occurances per line, but i didn't check.

Re:Here's something stupid to do. (2, Informative)

Muad'Dave (255648) | more than 10 years ago | (#7618088)


You guys are unblocking the file before searching, right? You'll miss instances of your that wrap around eol. Use:

dd if=prime6.txt of=p6.txt cbs=75 conv=block

I bet it's not that big (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613502)

Everyone claims their prime is over 6 million digits in length when in reality most are only about 5.5 million digits.

Wow! (3, Funny)

HoldmyCauls (239328) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613526)

It's actually 1916 pages in lynx under a 1024x768 framebuffer!!!

Hah, you really thought I actually counted for a second there!

Re:Wow! (1)

JeffMagnus (133746) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614771)

You can claim to be using a console application and then tell us the number of pixels you use. What counts is the rows and columns.

Get it straight leetboy.

40th? (4, Insightful)

Tom7 (102298) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613527)

This is not necessarily the 40th Mersenne Prime, just the 40th that we've found. We still need to prove many ones in between to be composite before we can mark its place as 40th.

Re:40th? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7621844)

Because they were obviously checking 2^p-1 using no particular order for p.

Time to update all pages (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613560)

The first Mersenne primes are 3, 7, 31, 127, etc. There are only 39 known Mersenne primes.

Well, now it is 40 known Mersenne Primes, and also 6 discovered by the GIMPS: they need to change the front page to reflect this, and also some banners ("the largest 5 Mersenne primes").

I think it's worth noting that GIMPS not only discovers new Mersenne primes, but also is the discoverer of the biggest six known ones.

Awesome! (4, Funny)

falsification (644190) | more than 9 years ago | (#7613577)

This is great news. Once we have the 42nd, we will know the secret of the universe.

Re:Awesome! (1)

fmlug.org (695374) | more than 10 years ago | (#7613883)

Yes but only if we are asking the right question.

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614130)

Too bad nobody knows if there even are 42 of them. It's conjectured that Mersenne primes are infinite in number but this has not been proven. There could be only 40.

math == piracy (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613724)

by a strange coincidence, the 40th prime is also an MP3-encoded audio file of an unreleased Missy Elliot track.

the RIAA is lobbying to have mathematics outlawed due to the $400 billion lost yearly to these illegal primes.

remember kids, learning math makes you a pirate! stick to watching TV and eating delicious Oreo(R) cookies!

not prime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613736)

isprime(2^20996011-1);

Nope, divisible by 2.

Re:not prime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#7613770)

are you okay? any power of 2 subtracting 1 is not going to be divisible by 2

Re:not prime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7613824)

2^0-1 = 0

Re:not prime (1)

luckyguesser (699385) | more than 10 years ago | (#7613841)

*ahem*
with one exception :)

Re:not prime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7613901)

2^(ln(3)/ln(2))-1 = 2

Re:not prime (1)

luckyguesser (699385) | more than 10 years ago | (#7613920)

okay... corrected version:
Any expression
2^n
where n is a positive integer will be even,
and subtracting 1 will make it odd.

Re:not prime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7613992)

But in C,

printf("%d", 2^3-1);

outputs 0.

Re:not prime (1)

jquirke (473496) | more than 10 years ago | (#7617495)

That's because ^ is the XOR operator, not the power operator.

So effectively you are doing 2 XOR 3 - 1 = 1 - 1 = 0

Re:not prime (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7624840)

While you are correct in that ^ is the exclusive-or operator, your summary of what the code does is incorrect. The expression in the grandparent actually does 2 XOR (3 - 1) since subtraction has higher precedence [lycoszone.com] than bitwise exclusive or.

In this example, one could easily overlook this since both the correct and incorrect ways of interpreting it yield zero.

Re:not prime (1)

damien_kane (519267) | more than 10 years ago | (#7616176)

To all the other children of the parent, I think the logic that gave him his answer was something like the following:
(2^20996011-1) => 2^(20996011-1)
= 2^(20996010)
So of course, his logic is flawed, but the answer he came up with is correct based on his logic.
(2^20996010)mod 2 = 0
Therefore 2^20996010 is not prime

Maybe this kid should go back to elementary school and be re-taught the proper Order of Operations.

Well, that's the way it goes... (5, Informative)

Charbal (677787) | more than 10 years ago | (#7613802)

Of course, it didn't occur to me to take a look at the Science section before submitting my own copy of this story (which, since it has several other useful links in it, follows):

Michael Shafer, a graduate student at Michigan State University [msu.edu] , took time out for a "short victory dance" upon learning his computer had discovered the 40th known Mersenne prime [utm.edu] as part of The Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search [mersenne.org] . The number itself is 2**20996011-1 and when expressed in base 10, has 6,320,430 digits [wolfram.com] (zipped copy [wolfram.com] ). However, this is not necessarily the 40th Mersenne prime; there could be another between the previous largest known prime (M39=2**13466917-1, also discovered by GIMPS) and this one. Also worth noting is the still-standing USD$100,000 EFF prize [eff.org] for the discover of the first prime of at least 10 million (decimal) digits. GIMPS clients are available for various operating systems [mersenne.org] as well as information on how GIMPS would distribute the prize [mersenne.org] . A press release on the achievement [mersenne.org] is available as well as [newscientist.com] several [wolfram.com] articles [utm.edu] . Of course, this also means there's a new largest known even perfect number [utm.edu] in town.

Holy hyperlinks, Batman! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614017)

Be glad your story submission wasn't accepted otherwise you would have been inundated with "You got enough links there, buddy?" comments. There's a fine line between providing some background and ancillary material and going ape-shit with links.

Damn them! (1, Funny)

nytes (231372) | more than 10 years ago | (#7613977)

Just when I thought no one could ever guess my password. Now I have to change it again.

Re:Damn them! (1)

JDWTopGuy (209256) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614993)

You too? Crap!

Re:Damn them! (1)

damien_kane (519267) | more than 10 years ago | (#7616134)

That's ok; I'm using the 41st and 42nd Mersienne Primes as my passwords. which is why people have only got to the 40th MP so far...
I can't let the cat out of the bag until I find the 43rd and 44th and change all of my passwords.
You silly people... thinking the 40th was good enough... And didn't you learn that you shouldn't use the same password for everything? Now you see why :P

Re:Damn them! (1)

nytes (231372) | more than 10 years ago | (#7616537)

Hmmm... Mersienne Prime 41, Mersienne Prime 42, Mersienne Prime 43, Mersienne Prime 44.

Hey! That's the combination on my luggage!

HOTEL GREASED UP YODA DOLL (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614018)

On a dark butt-soaked highway
Jedi jizz in my hair
Warm smell of anal grease
Rising up through the air
Up ahead in the distance
I saw a frigthening sight
My head grew heavy, and my anas grew slim
I had to stop for the night
There he stood in the doorway
Smelled jedi ass juice smell
And I was thinking to myself
This could be Heaven or this could be Hell
Then he lit up a candle
And he showed me the way
There were voices down the corridor
I thought I heard them say

Welcome to the Hotel Greased Up Yoda Doll
Such a lovely place
Such a lovely place (background)
Such a lovely face
Plenty of room in my anus at the Hotel Greased Up Yoda Doll
Any time of year
Any time of year (background)
You can find him there
You can find him there

His jedi mind is Tiffany twisted
he's got the Mercedes bends
he's got a lot of pretty, pretty faggot boys
That he calls friends
How they dance in the courtyard
Sweet summer glory hole
Some grease their anus to remember
Some grease their anus to forget
So I called up the Captain
Please bring me my lube
He said
We haven't had that spirit here since 1972
And still those voices are calling from far away
Wake you up in the middle of the night
Just to hear them say

Welcome to the Hotel Greased Up Yoda Doll
Such a lovely Place
Such a lovely Place (background)
Such a lovely face
They're livin' it up at the Hotel Greased Up Yoda Doll
What a nice surprise
What a nice surprise (background)
Bring your alibies
Mirrors on the ceiling
Pink intestines on ice
And he said
We are all just prisoners here
Yodas stuffed up our ass
And in the master's chambers
They gathered for the feast
Plunge it up there with their steely knives
But they just can't kill the beast
Last thing I remember
I'm in ecstasy
Greased up yoda doll shoved right up my ass
Relax your anus said the nightman
We are programed for anal recieve
You can plunge that yoda doll up your anus
But you can never leave

If I post the number here... (2, Funny)

Twintop (579924) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614090)

...do you think we could /. the /. server?

6 Megabytes?????? (0, Troll)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614104)

Since when does it take a byte to represent a base 10 digit?

This number takes more like 21 KB to represent.

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614166)

It's the binary number with 20996011 consequtive ones and no zeros. That should be very amenable to compression, eh?

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (1)

Ster (556540) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614293)

I presume the *text* of the number is ~6 meg, since each digit as a character is a byte (assuming it's ASCII).

-Ster

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (1)

Tom7 (102298) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614314)

While we're doing decompression, I offer the following 12-byte version:

2^20996011-1

Seriously, though, where did you get the factor of 300 difference? You think it takes less than a 37th of a bit to represent each digit?

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615153)

You think it takes less than a 37th of a bit to represent each digit?

Pretty simple - binary math - each place of a binary number is a power of two. Since this number is 2^20996011 - 1, it can be represented in binary form as 20996010 1's, thus 21 KB. It's also why you can count to 2^10 - 1 on your fingers if you use each finger as a binary digit. If you try counting in ASCII base 10 digits on your fingers you can only count to 9, or 2^3 + 1.

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (1)

Scott Wood (1415) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615420)

And since when are there around 1000 bits in a byte? 20996010 bits is approximately 2.5 MiB.

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (1)

jareds (100340) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615430)

21 million bits is not 21 KB, which is 168 thousand bits. It's 20996011 (not 20996010) bits = 2624502 bytes = 2563 kilobytes = 2.503 megabytes.

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7616628)

Yes, but since this binary number is a string of 200996010 1's, it can be further compressed using run-length-encoding.

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7619565)

Sorry, 20996010 bits is about 20 Mb.

Re:6 Megabytes?????? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615710)

heh, since COBOL and RPG allowed it as one possible internal representation. On a not completely unrelated note, gotta love those old Gene Amdahl designed mainframes with their decimal divide instruction.

Hmm (0)

quantaman (517394) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614177)

By my calcs (could easily be wrong) my UID should show up about 6.3 times, turned out to be 7.

Xbox? (1)

k98sven (324383) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614224)

Quick? Has anyone checked yet to see if it factorizes the X-box public key?

(joke)

6 Megabytes, eh? (2, Informative)

jvmatthe (116058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614257)

If the number is 2^20996011 then it will take 2099602 bits to store it, or 2624501 bytes along with 4 extra bits. Let's just call it 2624502 bytes. Now, 2624502 divided by 1024*1024 (number of bytes I'd say are in a megabyte) is about 2.5. Which is all to say that somewhere around 2.5 megabytes would be required to store this number, not 6 megabytes as the post here claims.

This is all perfectly true, modulo an arithmetic error on my part. :^)

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (2, Informative)

k98sven (324383) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614317)

Yes, 2.5 megabytes is what it'd take to store it in binary form.

If we want it in human-readable form, convert to base-10:
2^20996011 = 10^(20996011*log(2))
20996011*log(2) is about 6,320,000, decimals.
1 decimal = 1 char = one byte = 6 Mb.

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

jvmatthe (116058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614440)

If we want it in human-readable form...
Right. Let's pick a USEFUL format. Good idea. ;^) Might as well use cuneiform while you're at it.

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

cicadia (231571) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614624)

I guess you didn't follow the link [mersenne.org] - it's a text document, with the prime in question represented as an ASCII base-10 string. 1 byte per digit. 6+ megabytes total.

It's not the most compact form, to be sure, but it is, as advertised, 6 megabytes of primey goodness.

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

jvmatthe (116058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614727)

You got me. I didn't follow the link. Still, pretty offensive to me to see someone store an integer that way. I spend a whole semester teaching my students to store their data in binary form... :^)

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 10 years ago | (#7616671)

I sure hope you also taught them the significance of byte order... :-)

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

evalhalla (581819) | more than 10 years ago | (#7616669)

I guess that an even more compact way to store it would be the binary representation of 2099601, since we know how to calculate the number.

Of course, it would be waaaay less impressive :)

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

JohnPM (163131) | more than 10 years ago | (#7617946)

Yes but it's easily compressible by representing it with the number 20996011 which can be stored using 25 bits. :)

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

jvmatthe (116058) | more than 10 years ago | (#7618099)

Give that man a cookie. ;^)

And if someone brings up storing numbers in base 20996011...

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

JohnPM (163131) | more than 10 years ago | (#7618156)

It gets better! 20996011 is necessarily prime as well. So, it's probably something like the 6 millionth prime, so you could store that using
only 22 bits! For further compression we'd probably have to prove the Riemann hypothesis. :)

Re:6 Megabytes, eh? (1)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 10 years ago | (#7620337)

> And if someone brings up storing numbers in base 20996011...

Mersenne #40: "Almost one of your base are belong to me!"

gigagilgamesh (0)

eyenot (102141) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614286)

surprise, it's actually a seed to algorhtmically produce a startling new gigapixel image of god's buttcrack!

This should be in "YRO" (1, Funny)

stienman (51024) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614296)

This should be in "Your Rights Online" since it contains my personal information:

Age, DL#, SSN, and even my IP! (19216801)

Obviously it's a thinly veiled ploy to steal my identity! I'ma gonna have to sue the student who found this. Be sure to check if you're in there! Luckily they don't have my credit card numbers, but I bet the next big prime is going to have all that and more.

Be afraid. Be very, very afraid.

-Adam

So what (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7614749)

I'm not trying to troll but I have to say ... so what?! How will that help anyone?! It won't. All those CPU cycles could have been used for protein folding or something like that. Something that can save the lives. Finding prime numbers in a pointless exercise.

Re:So what (1)

Kevan_moran (661209) | more than 10 years ago | (#7616933)

Actualy, I thought that this question, modded down to 0 was a good one,"How will that help anyone?! "

IMAM ( I am a mathematician, well ok I got a Maths degree from Trinity Cambridge ( and I di..dn't like Quicksilver (though I did love Cryptonomicon (and I can write Lisp )))).

But should I run the Seti screen saver, the Climate predication model or this one?

My current vote is the CP model but somehow it feels less sexy

(lastStatement.getSounds()==Statements.SOUNDS_GEEK Y ? statement.replace(lastStatement.text(),lastStateme nt.geekFactor()-1),lastStatement.text())

Ant deploy

I guess it's time to go home

New name for this? (4, Funny)

dacarr (562277) | more than 10 years ago | (#7614966)

If one googol is 10^100, would this number be about 6 smeagol?

6 million digits can be stored in under 6 megabyte (1)

notyou2 (202944) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615124)

It takes 6 megabytes to store 6 million digits if you encode them in ASCII... but this is highly inefficient.

It would be far more efficient to store them in binary coded decimal (BCD, google for it if you don't know what that is), which requires only 4 bits per decimal digit without sacrificing accessibility of the decimal data. In that case it would only take 3 megabytes.

Re:6 million digits can be stored in under 6 megab (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615661)

why not store them the most efficient way of all (for a binary machine, that is)...in binary! one decimal digit takes log base 2 of 10 ~ 3.32 binary digits, or 1,806,141 binary digits to store 6 million decimal digit number

Re:6 million digits can be stored in under 6 megab (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 10 years ago | (#7615670)

P.S.: of course, looking at the exponent of this prime, we see exactly how many binary digit it takes to encode it.

Re:6 million digits can be stored in under 6 megab (2, Interesting)

notyou2 (202944) | more than 10 years ago | (#7616636)

Because that involves an actual conversion between bases, which means that re-extracting (to print the digits out in base 10 again, for example) takes a non-trivial amount of time.

On the other hand, the number was probably originally calculated using base-2 arithmetic (I'm assuming), so storing in binary might be more natural anyhow.

Re:6 million digits can be stored in under 6 megab (1)

fok (449027) | more than 10 years ago | (#7617201)

bzip2 that's it! ;D

Not 6 megabytes, not 2 megabytes ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7616965)

The number is 2**20996011-1 . Count.

Looks like it takes 13 bytes to express this number.

You can make any number take up a large amount of memory, it just depends on how you write it. The number 2 can take up a gigabyte if you write it with enough 0's after the decimal space. 2.00000000000000000000000000000000000 blah blah you get the idea.

13 bytes. End of story.

mugabytes (2, Funny)

epine (68316) | more than 10 years ago | (#7617631)


How did 21.0 mebibits turn into six megabytes? I think he meant mugabytes.

Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated, and messages that are too short might be downrated.

You can quote me (1)

Alsee (515537) | more than 10 years ago | (#7617822)

The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor this number.

-

Re:You can quote me (1)

djcapelis (587616) | more than 10 years ago | (#7625210)

I can factor this SOB in my head!

1 and 2^20996011 - 1

Hah!

Re:You can quote me (1)

lordjake (730209) | more than 10 years ago | (#7644614)

The ability to factor primes. Wow, that would be an amazing breakthrough indeed.

Use Base 2^20996011 - 1 and write it as just 10 (1)

Cerpicio (691827) | more than 10 years ago | (#7618012)

Use Base 2^20996011 - 1 and write it as just 10. Seems like that'd be the most efficient way to write it. -- C.

6 Mbytes to represent? I don't think so. (1)

shrikel (535309) | more than 10 years ago | (#7618273)

So you're saying the number takes 6 Mbytes to represent in ASCII? I can do it in 12 bytes:

2^20996011-1

:)

Quit /.-ing their server (1)

RennieScum (118197) | more than 10 years ago | (#7622852)

Mathematica can figure the number quite nicely. Only took about 10 minutes on a P4 with 256MB RAM.

Dunno...can python handle this? bc? (heh)

Subatomic Particles (2, Interesting)

Kosher Beef Jerky (729463) | more than 10 years ago | (#7625357)

I was informed today that there are, in the universe, approximately 10^450 subatomic particles in the world. A prime number of 6 million digits (6* 10^100000) cannot be possibly demonstrated in any real object. I proceeded to calculate: Apparently the highest resolution for a monitor so far is 3840x2400 (Can anyone find higher?) and it would therefore take about 108506945 monitors of this resolution just to display 1 quadrillion pixels... (10^12). Any thoughts?

Ever closer (to something infinitely far away) (1)

SamSim (630795) | more than 10 years ago | (#7635268)

Another prime number? That's great! Not long now until we've found them all!

Sweet! (1)

mcp33p4n75 (684632) | more than 10 years ago | (#7638272)

With this new Mersenne prime one can also form a new largest perfect number. Euclid proved that if 2^k-1 is prime, then 2^(k-1)*(2^k-1) is a perfect number. Anyone care to put this together?

Re:Sweet! (1)

lordjake (730209) | more than 10 years ago | (#7644633)

That new perfect number would have over 12.5 million digits, which would take a while to work out....
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>