I am not sure I can trust the author of the article. If you look closely, he
states that i is the square root of 1. i is the square root of -1
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nathan Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "xqrpa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: Mersenne: Prime Time: L-L Test Doesn't Exist?
> To be fair, the quote says that it is difficult to determine the
> primarlity of 'a given large number'. Only an infentesimal fraction of
> arbitrary large numbers are Mersenne, or other special forms like
> 'Proth' primes.
>
> Nathan
>
> > xqrpa wrote:
> >
> > To All:
> >
> > In case you missed the article "Prime Time" in New Scientist, the URL
> > is:
> >
> > https://www.newscientist.com/features/features.jsp?id=ns226444
> >
> > The author goes on to write:
> >
> >
> > "Even so, it is mathematics that will gain the most. "Right now, when
> > we tackle problems without knowing the truth of the Riemann
> > hypothesis, it's as if we have a screwdriver," says Sarnak. "But when
> > we have it, it'll be more like a bulldozer." For example, it should
> > lead to an efficient way of deciding whether a given large number is
> > prime. No existing algorithms designed to do this are guaranteed to
> > terminate in a finite number of steps. "
> >
> > Well, the L-L Test seems to be just such an algorithm.
> >
> > Best Wishes,
> >
> > Stefanovic
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
> Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.exu.ilstu.edu/mersenne/faq-mers.txt
_________________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.exu.ilstu.edu/mersenne/faq-mers.txt
