Sorry for the delay in replying to this. It was never my understanding that the tables would be allowed to grow and grow. I just meant to imply that initially the tables will be subject to constant heavy updating and that more resticted criteria would slow this down a bit. I hope to be able to contribute when I get myself organised. Joe. There still seems to be misunderstanding about what my tables are intended to contain. They are *not* a complete list of all prime gaps known with length > 1000. They are *not* a complete list of all prime gaps with length/logp > 10.0 They are, or rather will be, the 20 gaps of largest known length with length/logp > 10.0 and the 20 gaps with length >1000 and with the largest known values of length/logp. Anyone who wants anything different is entirely free to do it themselves. Paul -----Original Message----- From: Barbara and Joe [mailto:the_mcleans@...] Sent: 03 October 2001 19:55 To: Prime Numbers; Paul Leyland Subject: Re: [PrimeNumbers] Prime GAP of 82794 Paul, Notwithstanding Milton's efforts, it does seem that very little effort is required to produce scores greater than 10. For example, I ran 2^201+1 to 2^201+10^7-1 through Newpgen then pfgw in a couple of hours and found a gap that scores 11+. Could I suggest to potential contributors so Paul's soon to arrive webpage on the subject that : 1) additional criteria be added for qualification - this might become more evident when the first lists are available. 2) an exhaustive survey of 2^x+1 to 2^x+y-1 for x >= 100 and y = 10^7, 10^8 or even 10^9. Joe. > There are no prime numbers between > > 10^5020+47311 > > and > > 10^5020-35483 > > yielding a prime GAP of 82794 (or 82795). I make 82794/ln(10^5020+47311) about 7.163. Well short of the 10.0 needed to get on my top-20 page. The latter, BTW, is now under construction and I hope to make it public within a day or two. Paul [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Message 3160 from Yahoo.Groups.Primenumbers