Date: Dec 8, 2012 2:13 PM
Author: Dr J R Stockton
Subject: Re: No Putnam spoilers please

In sci.math message <6wRoX+N1xSwQFw+U@invalid.uk.co.demon.merlyn.invalid
>, Thu, 6 Dec 2012 23:38:29, Dr J R Stockton <reply1249@merlyn.demon.co.
uk.invalid> posted:

>In that calculation, longcalc uses only elementary arithmetic, as used
>to be taught in schools in my day. Your proof, however, is 50%
>incomprehensible to me. Though it may well be right. Longcalc found an
>error in *a* printed representation of (3^349-1)/2, which you might have
>difficulty with. Fx : checks : I think it has found another one.


Can anyone (or more) please provide here the last ten decimal digits (in
order) of ((3^349)-1)/2, freshly and independently calculated and not
copied from any other medium, and not using my LongCalc or VastCalc?

--
(c) John Stockton, near London. Mail ?.?.Stockton@physics.org
Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, and links.
Correct <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line precisely "-- " (RFC5536/7)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (RFC5536/7)