Actually I should have let Steve answer this, but I can't ignore to say
that I already have pointed out that M89 is prime. So Steve had a
mistake. Okay?! I do several mistakes every hour.
It seems to me that everybody around here are angry young men all
waiting for the great oppurtunity to get themselves a Nobelprize while
stumbling on others work or ideas to get there! I don't think much fame
will fall upon the guy; most stones have already been turned so no easy
bugs are to be found.
So calm down, there are hundreds of millions errors to be done to find
the true stones of beauty in both the mersenne primes and the factors
derived from same source.
Shouldn't we rather stand shoulder by shoulder like we do conducted by
GIMPS and help each other with information sources, ideas, test of
ideas?
And when you have the opportunity of shooting some one down do it at
least in a friendly way. I don't think Steve ever had considered his
lines to be a "conjucture".
Just my few words, and maybe I will shot up for months for this; but I
will still consider if some simple TF is possible and my machines will
be running.
Happy hunting to you all
and Phil too
tsc
Steve Harris claimed that M89 is not prime, but it is! So his
conjecture about being able to eliminate a few Mersenne
candidates
because the exponent is a factor of a non-prime Mersenne number
won't
work.
Phil Moore
________________________________________________________________________
_
Unsubscribe & list info --
http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ --
http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
_________________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
