Can someone say more or less what the relationship is between the price of the coin and the number of prime gaps found?

For example when it was at 200 there might have averaged a certain number found. At 900 is there more or less 4.5 times as much computing power finding 4.5 times the numbers?

Or is the price of the coin not a good indicator of what the network as a whole is doing?

- - - - -

added

When the price goes up, more people mine the coin? So more computing power is put into using the Gapcoin Algorithm?

[I'm not a miner and have only a vague understanding of mining concepts, including "difficulty", and I'm sure a lot of others are in the same category. No doubt some benefit comes from popularizing coins like this, and the person who recently bought it up did something for the process, I'm just wondering the dynamic of "price vs relative significance of Gapcoin" or "price vs computing power used to find numbers".]

Is the reward, price, or any other gapcoin feature dependent on setting records? I thought that was just a side effect.

< >

Agreed. "Records" or "Work done by the algorithm" is the goal. Gap has shown that it's algorithm actually does offer results. No possibility of bullshit as far as I can tell. So at this point those variables [reward, price etc] might be things that could sharpen the work done by the coin. But a person has to understand what the relationship is and I don't.

- - - - -

The wallet itself seems quite resource intensive

50 % of cpu for quite a while, and several nodes

addnode 73.234.214.49:31469 add

addnode 212.227.143.155:31469 add

addnode 91.155.235.8:31469 add

addnode 62.28.52.105:31469 add

addnode 193.242.148.251:31469 add

addnode 46.138.23.32:31469 add

addnode 82.14.91.254:31469 add

but has not actually gotten past the first few blocks yet. Most coins are zipping along by now even on this old computer. The wallet does seem to need something.

--

Here is an article that is interesting but does not mention Gapcoin

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20141210-prime-gap-grows-after-decades-long-lull/Also links that seem related to the discussion below

The trailer for a film about Yitang Zhang

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCYYDB_ItM0http://www.zalafilms.com/films/countingabout.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitang_ZhangA quote from

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/pi-prime-numbers-cybersecurity"Primes and pi suggest a benign infinity, a pleasing order—pi because of its endlessness and its relation to the circle, and primes because no matter how far you travel on the number line you will always encounter a prime, as Euclid proved in 300 B.C. Recently, Yitang Zhang solved a problem involving prime numbers called bounded gaps that had been open for more than a hundred years. Zhang proved that no matter how far you go on the number line, even to the range where the numbers would fill many books, there will, on an infinite number of occasions, be two prime numbers within seventy million places of each other. (Other mathematicians have reduced this gap to two hundred and forty six.) Before, it had not been known whether any such range applied to prime numbers, which seem to behave, especially as they get larger, as if they appear at random."