It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Primality Algorithm

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

Well, I guess that’s precisely where it’s at. My formula CAN deal with big numbers... the real problem, though, is whether or not the hardware and/or software can. I managed to find an online calculator which let me use 50 digits but that’s as good as I’ve got, while both PHP and JavaScript freak out after around 15 decimal places. Nonetheless, if the platform is up to the job then the formula should work flawlessly.


edit on 20th October 2015 by VigiliaProcuratio because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: VigiliaProcuratio
There is always Matlab. It has a lot of functions already in place for testing and calculating prime numbers and forums for the software are fairly active discussing computing limitations and other things like that.

Would probably suggest picking up some uni readers on computer science and other related things if you can. Lot of universities near me (not sure where you are) have stacks of books and readers being given away for free every semester and Matlab is taught at a lot of them.

Is always a danger of reinventing the wheel / retreading ground on these things and you seem to be learning as you go a fair bit. Go have a talk to someone at a nearby university? I've found academics like coffee and coffee often buys huge piles of reading materials.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   
If you truly have the solution to it then lets just say a lot of encryption is going to go bye bye.

But probably you've got the solution someone 200 years ago found and while it works its not very practical and thus not used so it seems like you discovered it



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: VigiliaProcuratio
a reply to: dashen

Oh, believe me now... I had one of the worst headaches ever yesterday and that is no joke! I’m unsure if it was all those numbers or the fact that I had 503 cups of coffee while I was working at it.
 


Leonardo Davinci did appear to have an aversion to the number 3 for some reason?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: VigiliaProcuratio

I don't want to rain on your parade but you need to PROVE that your method identifies ALL primes, not just the ones compliant with your algorithm.



posted on Oct, 21 2015 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: VigiliaProcuratio
a reply to: Pinke

Well, I guess that’s precisely where it’s at. My formula CAN deal with big numbers... the real problem, though, is whether or not the hardware and/or software can. I managed to find an online calculator which let me use 50 digits but that’s as good as I’ve got, while both PHP and JavaScript freak out after around 15 decimal places. Nonetheless, if the platform is up to the job then the formula should work flawlessly.


If you want to do arithmetic on numbers containing millions of digits you're going to need a very specialized math library, probably a string based math library. Even just generating a random number containing millions of digits can take a while, let alone performing mathematical operations on such a large number. A very long time ago I created a string based long division function which could be used to divide an arbitrarily long number by any single or double digit number. It was quite fast but I'm not sure if I still have the code. I wrote that code because I was attempting to test prime numbers exactly like you, and I discovered that in the end prime numbers will always beat you.
edit on 21/10/2015 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2015 @ 05:47 AM
link   

a reply to: Pinke

I asked my local uni, which I live right next to, if there was a maths tutor I could chat with... but they only have one. It’s more of a sports and nursing orientated uni. I might go to Birmingham to see what I can do, I’m sure they’ll have more than one professor let alone tutor.

a reply to: chr0naut

My method will work for any given number (well, that’s a lie because it doesn’t for 1, 2, 3 and 5... but it certainly does from 7 to 57, including the composites, and I can’t test any higher because I don’t have enough fingers). Of course it won’t identify every number unless it is explicitly tested, because there are supposedly an infinite number of primes.

What I’m saying is this... the highest known prime has around 14.5m digits and therefore whatever computer (or network of) was capable of crunching such a ridiculous number will most likely be able to execute my theory, possibly to the extent of verifying a billion digits.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Well, maybe this is where I’ve discovered something... I am not talking about dividing a given number by others in order to establish whether or not it is divisible. It is basically an analysis of the given number; I have noticed a pattern which appears to be law.


edit on 21st October 2015 by VigiliaProcuratio because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: VigiliaProcuratio

a reply to: Pinke

I asked my local uni, which I live right next to, if there was a maths tutor I could chat with... but they only have one. It’s more of a sports and nursing orientated uni. I might go to Birmingham to see what I can do, I’m sure they’ll have more than one professor let alone tutor.

a reply to: chr0naut

My method will work for any given number (well, that’s a lie because it doesn’t for 1, 2, 3 and 5... but it certainly does from 7 to 57, including the composites, and I can’t test any higher because I don’t have enough fingers). Of course it won’t identify every number unless it is explicitly tested, because there are supposedly an infinite number of primes.

What I’m saying is this... the highest known prime has around 14.5m digits and therefore whatever computer (or network of) was capable of crunching such a ridiculous number will most likely be able to execute my theory, possibly to the extent of verifying a billion digits.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Well, maybe this is where I’ve discovered something... I am not talking about dividing a given number by others in order to establish whether or not it is divisible. It is basically an analysis of the given number; I have noticed a pattern which appears to be law.



There IS a pattern (of sorts) to the primes, it is just that it is perturbed slightly, away from simple order.

There are several conjectures over what the perturbation may be and they (for the most part) seem to work (i.e: the Reimann Zeta function). The issue is that they are not proven to always work in all cases. (Nor have they been proven to NOT work. The issue is in the rigorousness of the proof).


edit on 23/10/2015 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: VigiliaProcuratio

Tests for primality by looking for divisors of small numbers, like 3, aren't interesting.

What's difficult is if a large number has some large factors.

en.wikipedia.org...

You're behind Fermat by a few hundred years.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 05:14 PM
link   
There are a lot of interesting visual methods for finding prime patterns, the Ulam spiral is a simple example.

en.wikipedia.org...

Any media that can sustain predictable wave patterns can be used to factor very efficiently.

X ray sources from distant constellations should do a lot of factoring before reaching the Earth.
Should explain some of the pulse patterns from sources like quasars.




edit on 23-10-2015 by Cauliflower because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   

I guess it’s difficult for to me to properly discuss this without first elaborating on the method which I have developed. Forget about modular mathematics, forget about weird algebra and forget about factoring. So far as the mod formulae are concerned they do appear to work in some cases, but unless somebody cares to explain otherwise then I’m assuming that those methods do not go so far as distinguishing a relation between primes and composites. On the contrary, I have done exactly that. Watch this space.

a reply to: Cauliflower

That’s interesting, very interesting indeed.. but again there is hardly an explanation for such a relation. I mean, I can’t exactly explain my own theory because that’s like explaining why matter exists in the first place. That there is certainly a pattern and it can probably be computed as well given the plethora of coding languages we have at our disposal today. So yeah, I’ll be giving you another example which shows a definite link between the numbers.


edit on 23rd October 2015 by VigiliaProcuratio because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2015 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel




You're behind Fermat by a few hundred years.


Probably thousands if they were good at keeping secrets like the Pythagorean inner circle.
There were plenty of patterns for the ancients to distinguish (not that everybody noticed)




edit on 24-10-2015 by Cauliflower because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join