Re: Fastcode IsPrime B&V 3.1

From: Reinaldo Yañez (ryaayr_at_arnet.com.ar)
Date: 11/16/03

  • Next message: Theodor Kleynhans: "Re: Question about extending CRC32 to CRC64" 
    Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:23:23 -0300

    Hi Dennis:
                    I will try to answer your questions:
    Question 1: I do not know.
    Question 2 & 3: Modular congruence is an equivalence relationship. The =
    (equal) sign is somehow "overloaded", in truth it should be noted like " =
    (_m) " (conguent modulo m). Generally that's notated p = q (m) "p is
    congruent to q modulo m" More on this can be found here:
    http://www.risc.uni-linz.ac.at/courses/ws99/formal/slides/relations1/index_2
    6.html

    Regards,
    Reinaldo

    "Dennis" <marianndkc@home3.gvdnet.dk> wrote in message
    news:3fb67a54$1@newsgroups.borland.com...
    > Hi Guys
    >
    > I am still messing around with the basics. I am trying to understand the
    > different prime tests presented on the prime pages
    >
    > http://www.utm.edu/research/primes/prove/index.html
    >
    > In chapter 2.2 Fermat's little theorem is explained and used as basis for
    a
    > Weak Probable Prime Base test.
    >
    > Question 1: Why is "Weak Probable Prime Base" abbreviated PRP and not WPPB
    > or PPB?
    >
    > Some text from the theorem.
    > "In particular, if p does not divide a, then ap-1 = 1 (mod p)."
    >
    > Question 2: Should the formula correctly be written like this? ap-1 mod P
    =
    > 1.
    >
    > Some text from the explanation.
    > "If the result is not one modulo n, then n is composite."
    >
    > Question 3: Is this true; one modulo n = 1, and should the sentence be "If
    > the result is not 1, then n is composite." ?
    >
    > Regards
    > Dennis
    >
    >

  • Next message: Theodor Kleynhans: "Re: Question about extending CRC32 to CRC64"

    Relevant Pages
    Loading