Talk:Cunningham Project

Latest comment: 5 years ago by MFH in topic Broken links to references

"The Brent-Montgomery-te Riele table forms an extension to the Cunningham tables, for 13 < b < 1000."

The above sentence from the article should apparently read "... for 13 ≤ b < 100." but I am not confident enough to edit the article. (Notice the less-than-OR-EQUAL-TO sign.)

(See http://wwwmaths.anu.edu.au/~brent/factors.html, the apparently current version of the Brent-Montgomery-te Riele tables, and please remove this bit of discussion if you either edit the actual article accordingly or find this analysis flawed.)

You are of course right; they didn't skip base 13. I've changed it. Ntsimp (talk) 15:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cunningham project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:13, 15 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Formula for b^n+1

edit

I have a problem with the formula b^n + 1 = product_{ d|2n, d!|n} Φ_d(b). Obviously d=1 is always a solution, but for b=2 it does not give a factor since Φ_1(2) = 2-1 = 1 (if I assume correctly that Φ are the cyclotomic polynomials). For n = 1,2,3,4,5,6,... the d's > 1 are {},{2},{},{2},{},{2,3},... repeating periodically up to 24 which has an additional 4. But this would mean that 2^1+1 = 2^3+1 = 2^5+1 etc, which is obviously wrong. — MFH:Talk 22:36, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

edit

The links in references are all(!) broken. I could not find available versions of the documents: the relevant page on ams.org does not allow to d/L the Brillhart et al paper. I will change some links to "DOI" which should not rot as fast, but if s/o knows better sources (preprint server etc) PLEASE add it! - — MFH:Talk 23:37, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply