Anonymous user
Talk:First perfect square in base n with n unique digits: Difference between revisions
Talk:First perfect square in base n with n unique digits (view source)
Revision as of 06:40, 12 June 2019
, 4 years ago→Minimum start for Pascal version: yes, it was a copy and paste error
(→Minimum start for Pascal version: possible correction for base 34) |
m (→Minimum start for Pascal version: yes, it was a copy and paste error) |
||
Line 463:
::: try to fix it, when the still running even numbers finished. I don't think to let 37 start.
:::: I've been trying to verify the larger results produced by the Pascal program. I have verified the results as proper ''root,square'' pairs, except for 29 and 34.<br/><br/>On base 29, the figures verify as pandigital, but the value seems like it could be lower. It seems to me that the square could start with 102234... or higher, and not 102345677... or higher.<br/><br/>I was unable to verify pandigital results:<pre>BB6GLLFX5V75RA3RRL 102345679JICE8KP5LXA8L3QUPUWFPE4P</pre> for Base 34, as there are a number of duplicated digits in the square. But by considering the ''testcount'' value, I came up with the following result: <pre>5SEMXRII42NG8AKSL 102345679JIESRPA8BLCVKDNMHUFTGOQWX</pre>which has only one of every digit. Or, the actual minimum square for base 34 is a lower number. Perhaps a "copy paste" error caused this discrepancy on base 34?--[[User:Enter your username|Enter your username]] ([[User talk:Enter your username|talk]]) 23:59, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
::::: Still a work in progress.base 34 was a copy and paste failure<pre>Testcount : 205094427126 5SEMXRII42NG8AKSL 102345679JIESRPA8BLCVKDNMHUFTGOQWX 28900.032 seconds</pre> i have changed the program and checked, if the last digit of the number squared leads to the last digit of the squared number, and it does so <lang pascal> //check last digit sqr(num) mod base must be last digit of sqrnumber
if (sqr(Num.ntb_dgt[0]) mod Num.ntb_bas) <> sqr2B.ntb_dgt[0] then</lang>i stopped Base 36 at <pre>3,044,863 Mio tests about 1.1 e12 / day</pre> i will try to use multithreading. Instead of checking every 35 n-threads check every n*35, but using different start values.Tread 0 at normal , thread 1 at normal + 35 .. thread n-1 at normal + (n-1)*35
| |||