Anonymous user
Talk:Pierpont primes: Difference between revisions
m
→Final Digits: corrected a typo.
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) (→Scale back 2nd part?: Want some cheese with that whine?) |
m (→Final Digits: corrected a typo.) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 15:
::::::: I rather suspect that the larger restriction for many Basics is (lack of, or not built in) large integer support rather than primality testing. (And even more than that, the lack of anyone with the urge to write an entry...) As I demonstrated above, Miller-Rabin is more than adequate to do the testing, and helpfully, there are many implementations in many different languages [[Miller–Rabin_primality_test|already available]]. If that doesn't float your boat, Pierpont numbers specifically lend themselves to primality testing by Proths theorem. The task is only asking for the 250th prime. There are other tasks asking for the 100000th prime; Cuban primes for example. If you don't want to do the task, or think it is too difficult, don't do it. It has already been demonstrated that the stated goals are pretty easily achievable. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 12:01, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
:::::::: The Rosetta Code task Miller-Rabin primality test isn't that hard to code, but it should be noted that the Rosetta Code M-R primality task was to write the code, it wasn't necessary to use the code and show examples, which some computer programming languages chose to do, other entries/solutions used much smaller numbers to test, if at all. Moreover, the 100,000<sup>th</sup> cuban prime (by the way, isn't capitalized) is only 13 decimal digits which can be easily tested for primality by trial division. The 250<sup>th</sup> Pierpont prime (2<sup>nd</sup> kind) has 34 decimal digits. Not exactly a good or fair comparison. I concur that the stated goals are pretty easily achievable, which is especially true if one is using an '''isPrime''' BIF. I would like you to re-read the very first query on this page. Clearly, it was a concern. Just because a few (nine at this time) computer programming languages can perform primality checks for large numbers doesn't mean that other languages can find that goal obtainable (testing for primality of 34 digit numbers). This probably shouldn't/needn't be an issue that needs voting on. Either it is or it ain't. People also vote with their feet. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:10, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
== Final Digits ==
Line 20 ⟶ 22:
Maybe showing the numbers of each possible final digit would be interesting. Also, the First kind are clearly more frequent than the second kind. --[[User:Tigerofdarkness|Tigerofdarkness]] ([[User talk:Tigerofdarkness|talk]]) 09:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
::Though thinking about it, the first kind can never end in 1 and the second kind can
| |||