20141029, 00:43  #34 
Feb 2013
2·229 Posts 
Too late to edit my last post.
Anyway, also this (the main numbers themselves): http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...00909153688079 is a factor of http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...53238801350043 Perhaps not needed? Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 20141029 at 00:45 
20141029, 06:35  #35 
Romulan Interpreter
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand
23073_{8} Posts 
(channeling my internal RDS): I devilishly assume that the idea was you only read the authors' names, and realize that you are trying to sell your rotten tomatoes to very skilful and experimented gardeners. About reading the pdf, according with the quality of your post we really doubt you can do that...

20141029, 10:07  #36 
Feb 2013
2·229 Posts 
Press More Information on the first link.
I think it better could show up there that this number is a composite factor (or part of) the second link, because it divides. Thanks! 
20141029, 12:23  #37 
Feb 2013
2×229 Posts 
Just a little note, because it is getting late here.
While I am still sitting at my desk, I am wondering about this little thing. I do not know whether or not someone told me so, but I was giving the impression or feeling that the subject of dealing with numbers is the science of the "poor". Replace "poor" with something else if you wish, but I made a search on Wikipedia on the word "operand". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operands Having a quick look at this article, a couple of things are missing out here. The most important thing missing is the subject related to division. You may be familiar with the terms and definitions being used or put up when an article does not meet the desired criteria. As you mathematicians should know very well, the operations dealing with addition, subtraction and multiplication are supposed to be working out correctly. But not so when it comes to division. Take 7/3 for example. Using whole numbers should return 2 as the result. Eventually it becomes 2.33333... The difference between 2 and 2.33333... is the error rate when it comes to division. For the division of much larger numbers, the error rate may become significantly larger. Maybe it should read 2,33333... for clarity. So, by comparison, dividing 35 with 5 gives 7 in return. Multiplying 7 with 5 gives 35. Similarly, dividing 35 with 7 gives 5 in return. Multiplying 5 with 7 gives 35. Is it always that easy? Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 20141029 at 12:27 
20141029, 17:35  #38 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
3×1,667 Posts 
"error rate"? You have been warned once in this thread to stop making up your own notation; I suggest you also stop making up your own terms, particularly when your definition of them amounts to the example you give.
You declared "using whole numbers", and then "eventually it becomes". Eventually? how does time pass in any way when discussing arithmetic? Whole numbers "become" decimals? Division is not closed on whole numbers. Division is closed on rationals (except for dividebyzero, obv). It seems that you are complaining division is flawed because you've chosen a set that it is not closed over. So what? 
20141029, 21:11  #39 
Feb 2013
712_{8} Posts 
Did not mean to be rude. Only one bottle of beer and some potato chips before going to bed last night.
Perhaps better write a sentence or paragraph in the previous post this way instead. As you mathematicians certainly know very well, the operations dealing with addition, subtraction and multiplication are supposed to be working out correctly. Before I continue, I made some updates on 10^40321 in the factordb last evening. Hope this shows up there. When I was a little younger, I was having a pocket calculator that was able to display some 8 digits in the display. Quite often the result of an operation ended up with the letter "E" at the right, perhaps lower bottom of the display. At that time I interpreted this "E" as meaning or implying "Error". One such example is division by zero (0). Becoming a little more mature, I have been able to learn that this in fact means Infinity ("~"). Infinity in fact means something (a number) which is undefined. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity Try using Windows Calculator with the standard "Degree" setting for the trigonometric functions. Input 90 and choose / select the tan() function or key. The result of this operation is another example of "Infinity". The number being returned becomes undefined. Since numbers may be both positive and negative, you may also be able to define a negative "Infinity"  number. The opposite goes for the number 0. You may be able to define an "Infinitesimal" small number, but in such a case it rather becomes (+)0.00000000....00001, or 0.00000000....00001 instead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitesimal As mentioned, replace 0.00 with 0,00 if this suits you better. BTW: One little thing to mention. When I write this post, I do not have the scroll up/down box at the right when the text (the number of lines) becomes longer than the size of the box. A small annoyance in an otherwise great webpage. For now I have to press CTRLHOME or CTRLEND in order to get to the top/bottom of the text. Edit: Apparently fixed. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 20141029 at 21:40 
20141029, 22:28  #40 
"Tapio Rajala"
Feb 2010
Finland
13B_{16} Posts 
Dear storflyt32,
it is wonderful to see that you are developing many of the fundamental steps in abstract thinking (probably in a similar way that I and many others have gone through these in our youth. I still recall with warmth the (re)discovery of complex numbers, Riemann sphere etc. in the elementary school by wondering about squareroots of negative numbers and infinity.) However, for the most of the readers of this forum your observations will seem trivial and thus are hardly appreciated. Some might even call you with bad names because of this. I do not wish to discourage you, but maybe you could concentrate more on thinking about this stuff, reading books or wikipedia on this stuff, talking with friends and relatives (if they can take it) and enjoying your discoveries... we all agree they are fantastic! (just don't write about them). 
20141029, 23:15  #41 
Feb 2013
2×229 Posts 
Hi, rajula!
Thank you for mentioning / suggesting the term "abstract thinking". I shall be looking it up. Edit: More here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_thinking Have not read it yet. Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 20141029 at 23:17 
20141105, 01:03  #42 
Feb 2013
2·229 Posts 
http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...71665793378681
http://factordb.com/index.php?showid...00000723307189 45629566105789425350275021920015123621770407143528500714049525955646634476732429688397036395803670164293742312328034451177219063420208650356477519060825706225303929109492562233810289745687336928610630591031896947667470094702213135161082147761577695892993981561125237422095824991625334565127507075502559661927403509543875063532403654530763764126828623964060386804102566409362791327521742800050805262372105342592833936637349816394615124263630866678263789379833621473996917435576445120589046042043668280748371665793378681 C 518 (show) 4562956610...81<518> = 4562956610...81<518> http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...56016513851317 http://factordb.com/index.php?showid...00000716666264 P 171 (show) 3935186913...17<171> = 3935186913...17<171> 393518691368286368255623097069712252457001299624045408491686917273145611784818640675586069862814412735711970194801864005631730155162613125109843290448727462456016513851317 http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...08234773648693 http://factordb.com/index.php?showid...00000723307203 P 348 (show) 1159527288...93<348> = 1159527288...93<348> 115952728819901507458166387237485521241477795414849559021457137148634864009879070236848874957279231891557575945967709239155558147675198763716668975148823497966114660403171775054227401855658787987518283647785074569363972355151586812277834981875328066633865140192392195632056010493622564741857124405112070535514914383391682856842412807108234773648693    http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...05906426188373 http://factordb.com/index.php?showid...00000721260791 C 1180 (show) 3106813337...73<1180> = 3106813337...73<1180> C 1180 (show) 3106813337...73<1180> = 3106813337...73<1180> 3106813337466386245901867721801754771887327565922746669951959154873468110801292589233810050404320090663701785937700569108146409680058835566712225655240451504153631729474248532907179609691538202655989811577409833805879338674829461631494199095393812745141778803344900395181048096307686461368863941578920432813053194954203166240311484605521959759922445977821711269282527974517760419145125740169079941898692091774481300709196471121509701488606767661802672451412806199875386698299141137325319346127327741652944626014089253209726141986802232494715135444932178873464258650173215507053312459481059188993085960760997040971600872758525878507323394782833261712609904617230487820723843772720380492409188243708908800551670914484261935857245949199891801826952811781825460477938660021422352279220982260130781355092005548881884024438263354434966091867710076423271179673244299386023313173285154856427365591354996717332792391414582081243977207782642930598327762950203864414602117614748097776833056459062769555898113671862751576927328547367390836604790454747959076340878101219416618620664944941037019552123829534006240056954596292388063721010607482342178473469230844101853114593473335405906426188373 http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...08234773648693 http://factordb.com/index.php?showid...00000723307203 P 348 (show) 1159527288...93<348> = 1159527288...93<348> 115952728819901507458166387237485521241477795414849559021457137148634864009879070236848874957279231891557575945967709239155558147675198763716668975148823497966114660403171775054227401855658787987518283647785074569363972355151586812277834981875328066633865140192392195632056010493622564741857124405112070535514914383391682856842412807108234773648693 http://factordb.com/index.php?query=...43089817881761 http://factordb.com/index.php?showid...00000716659445 P 833 (show) 2679379234...61<833> = 2679379234...61<833> 26793792341807736634989996206703221928991974551245243656608357295705957662434910993643582652735889417114477578195143305386606165633460494479352618199027436253125675855298638156898862031234291454088819107336178258992586290735281701539436654426222016224877857981627455730618970402046410998073275965537433922830595878994170968342869032386464859697352301955142765924502144312285624617397751070093352625339376546895701802356390969877934653964801145307320505921478365986799435114748798120051403951756511452487507878545576504672167732467680117932062327299154686527365885435933234831102575520705134772227077571687294915880830214822585884390631938094801973796975327038072799759540642174453561362916450601573932599514869012246747271586372225973769612485189642375073189717303788897993289702939522295629255121309853562659549833018243089817881761 
20141105, 04:41  #43 
Romulan Interpreter
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand
9,787 Posts 
Cmd resurrected ...
Any idiot can take two primes of ~300 digits, multiply them, and put the result in the DB. Then post the product on the forum, without 'code' tags. People were banned from fdb for less... Last fiddled with by LaurV on 20141105 at 04:42 
20141105, 07:06  #44 
Feb 2013
2·229 Posts 
Is the size of a given number a problem here?
We all know that numbers like RSA1024 and RSA2048 can not be factorized at the present moment, because of the inherent limitations of the software itself, as well as computer hardware and software architecture, including processor and memory. RSA1024 is a 309digit number. RSA2048 is a 617digit number. Definitely I respect the value these two numbers are representing by making up a code which supposedly can not be broken and right now is being represented by means of an appropriate certificate for that given purpose. In this way information may be transferred across the web and be read and written by only two parties, namely the sender and the receiver of a given message. In another instance I might perhaps be dealing with a number like 10^10001. By just having a look at it, I am able to see that this number is divisable by 3 and also what it becomes next. Same goes with repdigit numbers and the similar. They go on forever, but most of them in the end show up as composite. So the question then becomes  where is the fun of it? Am I supposed to be able to factorize such numbers at all, or is it possible that the result may become unknown forever? Should I perhaps be doing something else instead? As long as 12 divides 8 and gives 1 as the result and not 2, I most likely am stuck with what I am doing. In the end I may be able to find a couple of factors which ends up being prime, but does it always work out for the big number you may be testing? Definitely science (including the science of numbers) is not infallible. Perhaps it is time for me to find something else to do instead? Thanks! Last fiddled with by storflyt32 on 20141105 at 07:16 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Composite being Prime  kruoli  FactorDB  5  20180216 16:54 
How can I prove this PRP prime?  siegert81  Math  2  20141119 10:24 
How do I prove a 4000 digit number is prime??  VJS  Lounge  4  20050509 20:56 
How do you prove a number is prime?  Alien  Math  12  20040107 11:36 
why not stop when composite is prove?  mdjvz  Software  4  20030928 17:13 