Not to brag or anything …

[Tom-K]

@jon-nyc said in Not to brag or anything …:

Good luck using your program on a number with over 41,000,000 digits.

I do it with my program at least twice daily. Once I got it up to 328,000,000 digits. But I forgot to write the number down.

[taiwan_girl]

@bachophile said in Not to brag or anything …:

when compared to infinity.

what is infinity +1?

[89th]

I bet in 100 years this will be like discovering 1+1=2. With quantum computing, such calculations should be nearly immediate. Then again maybe my expectations are too high. I'm also expecting within 20 years that AI will be able to accurately translate bird sounds into words. (no kidding)

[taiwan_girl]

@89th said in Not to brag or anything …:

I'm also expecting within 20 years that AI will be able to accurately translate bird sounds into words. (no kidding)

I had a friend who did some work translating Chinese TV/movies, etc into English captions for Netflix. That has decreased quite a bit.

I used to do real time translation but I also see that will decrease in the future.

[Klaus]

@89th said in Not to brag or anything …:

With quantum computing, such calculations should be nearly immediate.

Nope.

Quantum computing, even if it ever works, won't help with finding larger primes.

Only some very specific problems are theoretically sped up by quantum computers.

[Mik]

Yeah, computing primes is just a matter of dividing by all the possibilities and seeing if there is a remainder. And of course computers do not actually divide, they subtract a given number of times.

[Doctor Phibes]

In 20 years we won’t be allowed to look for primes because of the fear of upsetting all the other numbers

[jon-nyc]

@taiwan_girl said in Not to brag or anything …:

@bachophile said in Not to brag or anything …:

when compared to infinity.

what is infinity +1?

[89th]

@Mik said in Not to brag or anything …:

Yeah, computing primes is just a matter of dividing by all the possibilities and seeing if there is a remainder. And of course computers do not actually divide, they subtract a given number of times.

You and @Klaus definitely know more than me about primes!

[Klaus]

@Mik said in Not to brag or anything …:

And of course computers do not actually divide, they subtract a given number of times.

No, that would be way too slow. There are many many algorithms for efficient division of integer numbers, such as the Karatsuba algorithm or Newton-Raphson Division.

[Klaus]

@taiwan_girl said in Not to brag or anything …:

@bachophile said in Not to brag or anything …:

when compared to infinity.

what is infinity +1?

If you view numbers as ordinals, infinity + 1 is just yet another ordinal, and it is greater than infinity and smaller than infinity + 2.

[Axtremus]

And if you really, really, really want to do integer division with quantum computing:

https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1432167