Talk:Rare numbers: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→21+ digit rare numbers: two more) |
(→21+ digit rare numbers: more 22s found) |
||
| Line 530: | Line 530: | ||
There only seem to be 5 21 digit rare numbers, so I started looking at 22 digits. I found that each odd number of digits takes less time (about 80% of the time) of the previous even number of digits, but each even/odd pair (number of digits such as 16/17 vs 14/15) takes about 20 times a long as the previous pair, so the computation time increases dramatically for results above 19 digits. Here are a few found so far: |
There only seem to be 5 21 digit rare numbers, so I started looking at 22 digits. I found that each odd number of digits takes less time (about 80% of the time) of the previous even number of digits, but each even/odd pair (number of digits such as 16/17 vs 14/15) takes about 20 times a long as the previous pair, so the computation time increases dramatically for results above 19 digits. Here are a few found so far: |
||
<pre style="height:50ex;overflow:scroll"> 91st (2,788,047,868,437,576,408,872) |
|||
92nd (2,788,047,848,617,776,408,872) |
|||
93rs (2,788,047,888,617,376,408,872) |
|||
94th (2,788,047,668,617,596,408,872) |
|||
95th (2,939,521,557,527,542,149,392) |
|||
96th (2,576,494,893,971,995,836,752) |
|||
97th (2,576,494,891,793,995,836,752) |
|||
98th (2,939,521,359,525,562,149,392) |
|||
99th (2,939,523,577,527,340,149,392) |
|||
100th (2,939,523,779,525,320,149,392) |
|||
101th (2,939,501,759,705,522,349,392) |
|||
102th (2,939,503,537,707,740,349,392) |
|||
103th (2,939,503,375,709,360,349,392) |
|||
104th (2,727,651,947,516,658,327,272) |
|||
105th (2,414,924,323,311,045,383,042) |
|||
106th (2,622,935,643,751,276,481,162) |
|||
107th (2,414,924,301,133,245,383,042) |
|||
108th (2,622,935,621,573,476,481,162) |
|||
109th (2,622,937,641,933,274,481,162) |
|||
110th (2,622,955,841,933,256,281,162) |
|||
111th (2,414,946,523,311,023,183,042) |
|||
112th (2,622,957,843,751,254,281,162) |
|||
113th (6,344,828,989,519,887,483,525) |
|||
114th (2,620,937,863,931,054,483,162) |
|||
115th (2,620,955,641,393,276,283,162) |
|||
116th (2,620,955,623,931,476,283,162) |
|||
117th (2,959,503,377,707,360,349,192) |
|||
118th (2,747,736,918,335,953,517,072) |
|||
119th (8,655,079,574,515,659,614,468) |
|||
| ⚫ | (Provisionally numbered, not in final numeric order) This is probably about |
||
120th (8,655,079,374,155,679,614,468) |
|||
121st (8,045,841,654,642,561,594,308) |
|||
122nd (8,045,841,652,464,561,594,308) |
|||
123rd (8,655,059,576,513,659,814,468) |
|||
124th (8,655,059,772,157,639,814,468)</pre> |
|||
| ⚫ | (Provisionally numbered, not in final numeric order) This is probably about 90% of the search space. There may be a few more to go. Lots of 2,2 combinations there so far. Nearly half of all rare numbers under 21 digits start and end with 2. I guess we will see if that trend continues as more solutions show up... --[[User:Enter your username|Enter your username]] ([[User talk:Enter your username|talk]]) 06:17, 2 December 2019 (UTC) |
||
:Now that you've established that there are five 21 digit rare numbers, it might be worth mailing SSG (at guptass@rediffmail.com) to see if he'll add them to his list. |
:Now that you've established that there are five 21 digit rare numbers, it might be worth mailing SSG (at guptass@rediffmail.com) to see if he'll add them to his list. |
||