Re: Mersenne: Re: Munich prime party report

[Steve Harris]

EWMAYER wrote: >Personally, I don't think there's anything special about a ratio of 2.   Certainly not, but perhaps there may be something special about 2.1025, which is 1.45^2 ?  At any rate, the sample size is far too small to ascertain a good standard deviation, or to validate any hypotheses.   And I think I'll use "Zecher" for my next machine ID;  thanks for the tip :-)   Ian Halliday wrote: >...note that the exponents of M(13) and M(14) differ >by more than a factor of 2, as do the exponents of M(15) and M(16). >Similarly for M(35) and M(36) with M(37) and M(38).   I don't believe the 13-14 and 15-16 gaps are >2; still, you are correct about 35 to 38. But the 36-37 gap has a ratio of only 1.015, which is extremely small. [I recall that Roland Clarkson said he almost returned the M(37) exponent to the server as it was so close to M(36).]  I have mentioned here before that the large gaps tend to be adjacent to the small gaps, which is to be expected if the overall distribution is to remain around the average of 1.45 - but this cannot be counted on.   Alex Kruppa wrote: >next on schedule, if Steve can make it in March, is "eine >Maß", "Starkbier" and "Nockherberg"! :)   I am already completely familiar with both the Maß and Starkbier, even to the point of "eine Starkbier Maß" What better reason to go to Munich after Fasching! (I hope that does not further tarnish the reputation of mathematicians with Daidalos :-)   Happy new year,   Steve "Zecher" Harris