Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Factoring
67 views
Skip to first unread message
Mark Nelson
Feb 5, 2012, 3:08:02 PM2/5/12
to
For some reason Google Groups stopped sending me daily digests from
comp.compression. The fact that it took me a month to notice is
interesting all in itself.
Ernst is working on trying to factor the million digit number.
As I've mentioned before, if the million digit number just happened to
be prime, it would probably result in a win for someone. The prime
number theorem says that the number of primes below 10^1000000 is
4.3*10^999993.
This means the prime can be denoted by a number that saves six+ digits
over the million digit file.
Feed that number into a computational engine that has two
instructions: 1) calculate prime n, 2) print result
And you have defeated the million digit file by four bytes. I would
definitely count it as a win.
But this unlikely result brings up the more important question: why do
attempts to use factoring, combinatorial techniques, and mathematical
series inevitably result in derision in this NG?
Mostly because they have no track record. And they have no track
record because they don't usually produce useful results.
The interesting data that we want to compress is based on human
language and perception - even executable code is based on human
language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
more fractally than arithmeticy.
From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
really found anything interesting down these paths.
If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
not.
If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
get there.
- Mark
comp.compression. The fact that it took me a month to notice is
interesting all in itself.
Ernst is working on trying to factor the million digit number.
As I've mentioned before, if the million digit number just happened to
be prime, it would probably result in a win for someone. The prime
number theorem says that the number of primes below 10^1000000 is
4.3*10^999993.
This means the prime can be denoted by a number that saves six+ digits
over the million digit file.
Feed that number into a computational engine that has two
instructions: 1) calculate prime n, 2) print result
And you have defeated the million digit file by four bytes. I would
definitely count it as a win.
But this unlikely result brings up the more important question: why do
attempts to use factoring, combinatorial techniques, and mathematical
series inevitably result in derision in this NG?
Mostly because they have no track record. And they have no track
record because they don't usually produce useful results.
The interesting data that we want to compress is based on human
language and perception - even executable code is based on human
language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
more fractally than arithmeticy.
From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
really found anything interesting down these paths.
If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
not.
If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
get there.
- Mark
LawCounsels
Feb 5, 2012, 4:09:27 PM2/5/12
to
On Feb 5, 8:08 pm, Mark Nelson <snorkel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For some reason Google Groups stopped sending me daily digests from
> comp.compression. The fact that it took me a month to notice is
> interesting all in itself.
>
> Ernst is working on trying to factor the million digit number.
>
> As I've mentioned before, if the million digit number just happened to
> be prime, it would probably result in a win for someone. The prime
> number theorem says that the number of primes below 10^1000000 is
> 4.3*10^999993.
>
> This means the prime can be denoted by a number that saves six+ digits
> over the million digit file.
>
> Feed that number into a computational engine that has two
> instructions: 1) calculate prime n, 2) print result
>
> And you have defeated the million digit file by four bytes. I would
> definitely count it as a win.
>
> But this unlikely result brings up the more important question: why udo
> For some reason Google Groups stopped sending me daily digests from
> comp.compression. The fact that it took me a month to notice is
> interesting all in itself.
>
> Ernst is working on trying to factor the million digit number.
>
> As I've mentioned before, if the million digit number just happened to
> be prime, it would probably result in a win for someone. The prime
> number theorem says that the number of primes below 10^1000000 is
> 4.3*10^999993.
>
> This means the prime can be denoted by a number that saves six+ digits
> over the million digit file.
>
> Feed that number into a computational engine that has two
> instructions: 1) calculate prime n, 2) print result
>
> And you have defeated the million digit file by four bytes. I would
> definitely count it as a win.
>
> attempts to use factoring, combinatorial techniques, and mathematical
> series inevitably result in derision in this NG?
>
> Mostly because they have no track record. And they have no track
> record because they don't usually produce useful results.
>
> The interesting data that we want to compress is based on human
> language and perception - even executable code is based on human
> language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
> useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
> more fractally than arithmeticy.
>
> From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
> really found anything interesting down these paths.
>
> If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
> mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
> not.
>
> If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
> might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
> get there.
>
> - Mark
Mark :
> series inevitably result in derision in this NG?
>
> Mostly because they have no track record. And they have no track
> record because they don't usually produce useful results.
>
> The interesting data that we want to compress is based on human
> language and perception - even executable code is based on human
> language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
> useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
> more fractally than arithmeticy.
>
> From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
> really found anything interesting down these paths.
>
> If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
> mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
> not.
>
> If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
> might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
> get there.
>
> - Mark
Applauds than better than most insights shared that factoring,
combinatorics , mathematical series 'may yet' produce the results
( albeit most difficult ) but count as unlikely because so far all
results not yet support .... however this not mathematics ruled out
thought the challenge does not involve every days English type data,
specifically solely deal with only 'random' fair coin toss type
automata generated domain... .hence not dependent on attaining
crossover of 'fractal' domain into 'arithmeticity' domain
Matter of fact would be useful if you would elaborate on 'domains'
mentioned for the forum...
RE : in your web homepage discussions you offer to co-solve the Clay
Institute 7 remaining items & share the prize...... how confident are
you you have already 'mapped out' the proof solution routes to these ?
I will be in touch private email soon , on usual standard
confidentialiatity of course
Warm regards,
LawCounsels
jules Gilbert
Feb 6, 2012, 8:44:00 AM2/6/12
to
bicycling. These are utterly and completely different topics. When I
began to look at compression, I too, fumbled around, trying out
different approaches, But nothing,,,
Of course we all know the story about an alien who comes to earth,
discovers and organizes all human learning and understanding, and then
represents this massive quantity of knowledge as a bit-string, places
a binary point to the left of the binary sequence, and proceeds to
notch a stick at the position indicated. To which I say:
Good work if you can get it...
Ernst
Feb 6, 2012, 1:17:02 PM2/6/12
to
that I was trying to compress using factoring. I never wrote that I am
trying to compress by factoring because I am not.
I considered Mark's suggestion of generating the Nth prime but it
would need to function for all strings to be practical and in the
specific case of the third factor of MDN that third may or may not be
prime but it is huge and so there is a lot of cpu time to find out if
it is composite or prime. The idea of factoring in general would work
if the strings share enough factors in common but that too is
dependant on the data. But this is digression from the hash function
homework.
I am designing my first hash functions. The observation and report
of seeing factors in the recursive modulus "stream" was shared almost
directly with this NG after a couple requests in Mr. Nelson's forum
for the Million Digit Challenge.
I didn't expect a fight since I was following what rules I gleaned
from here. I presented the discovery, provided proof and asked
questions sharing it with everyone. However, each year I also have to
remind people that insults such as crank and kook are offensive and
each year it seems to be ignored. I am glad this is far out in the
open now. Perhaps some of you will avoid the bullying if you think I
will fight back. Not everyone will be alike in this world but we all
have two things in common that can serve as a basis for friendship and
they are; Everyone dies and no one knows everything.
As for the hash function design you have to admit that if all the
results from recursive modulus are strung together it is an output of
a long string of bits for an input of a small string of bits and that
is the attraction.
The problem I have currently is I have several choices of sources of
large data from small data to choose from so I am still deciding which
is more dependable. No Worry I am not asking for help here. The
recursive modulus just added more complexity to the deliberations is
all.
I simply was excited and sought out the friends to chat it up. If we
can stop the war it will be nicer for all of us. Compressing random
data is fringe yes but, for me it is a gateway to discovery.
I hope this helps clear the air.. I really am doing good works and I
am not spamming the NG with irrational boasts. This was nit-picking a
fight and insults and it took all of us to make it happen.
I care about working on Million Digit Challenge and there may be no
solution but it is still fun to discover what I can. Turn over the
proverbial rocks and see what may have been missed if anything and
simply enjoy the C language and my new 8-core! I realized that I use
C as my math and that my proofs are programs. That is one reason
there is a disconnect between some of you and I. Some of you think
math first code second.
But as what John Lennon Sang http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qwq76p93U8
"Party on Gath"
Be well
Ernst
Feb 6, 2012, 1:18:52 PM2/6/12
to
> Factoring and compression are as closely related as, say, fish and
> bicycling. These are utterly and completely different topics.
Not even by entanglement>? Just funnin here..
> bicycling. These are utterly and completely different topics.
Jim Leonard
Feb 6, 2012, 5:05:10 PM2/6/12
to
On Feb 6, 12:17 pm, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> What may have been over looked is that Sebastian inserted the idea
> that I was trying to compress using factoring. I never wrote that I am
> trying to compress by factoring because I am not.
Then why are you posting about factoring in comp.compression?
> What may have been over looked is that Sebastian inserted the idea
> that I was trying to compress using factoring. I never wrote that I am
> trying to compress by factoring because I am not.
Shouldn't you be posting in a math or cryptography group instead?
Ernst
Feb 6, 2012, 7:51:33 PM2/6/12
to
Stop and think I was designing a hash code not factoring when I saw
the factors in the stream of output.
Perhaps there is no crime here at all.
This is a good a way to say it and as good of a place. Jim has asked
the best questions of all of you so far and I thank Jim.
To Jim and all.
It is possible that there are only three factors of million digit
"number" as imported from the file into GMP.
My import settings I can disclose so we are all on the same page.
A friend has said he independently confirmed the third factor. He is
not using my software so I value his opinion but it's open to
verification of both the number and the software I am using to do it.
It is possible we have been trying to compress a large prime number
times 2^2
What will be needed is to determine if the third factor is prime or
composite. Recursive Modulus has shown it will emit both.
What needs to happen here is I must replace the cpu in the quad core
and it is now a speciality part. Once I have that machine back in
service then it can be dedicated to searching for factors.
Also there is a test in GMP that I was running when the old CPU let
me know it had heat issues.
I posted on Marks site that I am open to working with others to
further factor that third factor and if we use recursive modulus then
anyone helping can work blocks of numbers and together we can shorten
the search time.
I can dedicate 4 cores to the process so I can run 4 blocks at a
time.
Some additional programming is needed on the software to make it a
utility so that too is open to share.
Perhaps it is as simple as starting the search with M=1 and M++
instead of M = N-1 and M-- to find further factors using recursive
modulus. I admit I am chomping at the bit to write that version and
run it when I get access to the drives back
So here is an olive branch. I am a common man and this finding
factors of this new number is of unknown importance but I open it to
the Friends here if you want.
On the inside track here a friend and I are looking at ways to
predict if there will be a factor other than 1 early in sequence.
That would be helpful. That too is open to discussion.
I trust that knowing what exactly we have here in the third factor
can help us understand the nature of things. It would be helpful for
my reasoning to know have a prime or not since I assumed that it
wasn't. Even thought and expected a flood of small factors to stream
out but the whole event took a couple of seconds and there were
three.
So Jim, I think all tools are useful and if we exchange compress for
the word encode then what I am doing isn't such sin I think. Also Jim
if I remember right these guys will tell you data modelling is part of
data compression. Maybe it won't hurt to see what kind of number the
third one is even though this will be a factoring effort on the side
as we all work other things.
I trust my thoughts are kind and my words soft. I would like to be
this way if I can in this forum.
Ernst
LawCounsels
Feb 6, 2012, 9:40:06 PM2/6/12
to
On Feb 5,>
I think this is the 'secret sauce' Thomas enquired about how the
Russian monopolised English text compression prizes... .likely he
attained crossover from 'fractal' to 'arithmeticity', simple enough
for him to distant from this if not
Think this is not a 'big problem' ....may explore co-develop this
with you, should his 'secret technique' NOT already utilises 'domain
crossover'
> The interesting data that we want to compress is based on human
> language and perception - even executable code is based on human
> language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
> useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
> more fractally than arithmeticy.
>
> From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
> really found anything interesting down these paths.
>
> If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
> mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
> not.
>
> If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
> might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
> get there.
>
> - Mark
Mark:
> language and perception - even executable code is based on human
> language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
> useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
> more fractally than arithmeticy.
>
> From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
> really found anything interesting down these paths.
>
> If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
> mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
> not.
>
> If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
> might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
> get there.
>
> - Mark
I think this is the 'secret sauce' Thomas enquired about how the
Russian monopolised English text compression prizes... .likely he
attained crossover from 'fractal' to 'arithmeticity', simple enough
for him to distant from this if not
Think this is not a 'big problem' ....may explore co-develop this
with you, should his 'secret technique' NOT already utilises 'domain
crossover'
George Johnson
Feb 7, 2012, 7:42:21 AM2/7/12
to
"Mark Nelson" <snork...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:14e30a66-1765-4443...@i18g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Well, to be fair. The interesting truth is that once a not-too-clever
mathematician latches onto a concept like a pitbull dog they usually want
some payoff for all of their computation efforts. The proper term (one I
invented quite a while back without seeking fame for it), is "EMOTIONAL
INVESTMENT". It is the same psychological core reason for why gamblers
obsessively bet themselves to poverty seeking to regain money lost foolishly
(emotions are ruling their brain rather than cold logical deduction).
It may not help the fields of Data Compression (usually never given how
slow this field progresses), but it oftentimes will find applications in a
variety of Number Theory fields like Data Encryption (the inverse enemy of
Data Compression to a degree). It can help on noise signal processing
sometimes or pop up as a new Error Correction Coding. You never really know
until the inventor or discoverer has enough lateral thinking skills to
convert a concept failure into a reshaped concept win.
Once you get past the obvious problems of Escape Characters and code
function indexing costs, the mental discipline of Data Compression becomes
the root of many useful ideas which just need a bit of coaxing to convert to
profitable programs. However, you cannot reach many of the right states of
mind without going past the newbie trial & fail stages and the heavy
research into what others have done. Also you should never forget the
far-too-true phrase, "You cannot fix Stupidity." You can help people as much
as you prefer, but you can never correct their personal genetic limitation
on intellectual capacity with mere words and tutoring alone.
news:14e30a66-1765-4443...@i18g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
mathematician latches onto a concept like a pitbull dog they usually want
some payoff for all of their computation efforts. The proper term (one I
invented quite a while back without seeking fame for it), is "EMOTIONAL
INVESTMENT". It is the same psychological core reason for why gamblers
obsessively bet themselves to poverty seeking to regain money lost foolishly
(emotions are ruling their brain rather than cold logical deduction).
It may not help the fields of Data Compression (usually never given how
slow this field progresses), but it oftentimes will find applications in a
variety of Number Theory fields like Data Encryption (the inverse enemy of
Data Compression to a degree). It can help on noise signal processing
sometimes or pop up as a new Error Correction Coding. You never really know
until the inventor or discoverer has enough lateral thinking skills to
convert a concept failure into a reshaped concept win.
Once you get past the obvious problems of Escape Characters and code
function indexing costs, the mental discipline of Data Compression becomes
the root of many useful ideas which just need a bit of coaxing to convert to
profitable programs. However, you cannot reach many of the right states of
mind without going past the newbie trial & fail stages and the heavy
research into what others have done. Also you should never forget the
far-too-true phrase, "You cannot fix Stupidity." You can help people as much
as you prefer, but you can never correct their personal genetic limitation
on intellectual capacity with mere words and tutoring alone.
Ernst
Feb 7, 2012, 8:40:20 AM2/7/12
to
On Feb 7, 4:42 am, "George Johnson" <matri...@charter.net> wrote:
> "Mark Nelson" <snorkel...@gmail.com> wrote in message
There can be other reasons to seek answers than money or emotion.
There is a beauty in the Universe to behold and that itself is a
reward.
Just a thought.
> "Mark Nelson" <snorkel...@gmail.com> wrote in message
There is a beauty in the Universe to behold and that itself is a
reward.
Just a thought.
Thomas Richter
Feb 7, 2012, 10:58:29 AM2/7/12
to
On 07.02.2012 01:51, Ernst wrote:
> Because it is related to encoding and data compression is encoding.
> Stop and think I was designing a hash code not factoring when I saw
> the factors in the stream of output.
XML is also encoding. Thus, should I post XML related questions here?
> Because it is related to encoding and data compression is encoding.
> Stop and think I was designing a hash code not factoring when I saw
> the factors in the stream of output.
> It is possible that there are only three factors of million digit
> "number" as imported from the file into GMP.
that a random number between 0 and x is prime is approximately 1/log(x),
which means that the probability that a number of a million digits is
approximately prime is approximately (up to an unimportant factor of
about three, no need to be picky about this) one million to one against
you. If you have found three factors already, you can apply the same
argument again to the third factor just to get an idea on your chances.
> It is possible we have been trying to compress a large prime number
> times 2^2
> What will be needed is to determine if the third factor is prime or
> composite. Recursive Modulus has shown it will emit both.
you do your homework and read about what I have suggested. "Factoring by
the rho method" is much more powerful, but likely neither the top-notch
method as I'm not an expert in the field. Have you made an estimate how
long this may take?
> What needs to happen here is I must replace the cpu in the quad core
> and it is now a speciality part.
of two to four, a rather unimportant factor if the method you picked is
unsuitable. Honestly, whether I have to wait ten or twenty years for a
result I do not bother much. I wouldn't accept either time.
> I trust that knowing what exactly we have here in the third factor
> can help us understand the nature of things.
http://primes.utm.edu/howmany.shtml
and this is just the outcome of a five minute research, to give you some
ideas. What exactly do you want to learn from a single number?
Analyzing the methods would be beneficial, but as already stated, why
don't you do some minimal research and improve your methods, or at least
try to bring you up to date?
George Johnson
Feb 7, 2012, 9:27:30 PM2/7/12
to
"Ernst" <Ernst...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:5f881966-aa08-4362...@vd8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> There can be other reasons to seek answers than money or emotion.
>
> There is a beauty in the Universe to behold and that itself is a
> reward.
>
> Just a thought.
No arguments there, but unless you grow your own food on tax-free land,
hunt your own food, and have a clean water source, then somehow the money to
run the electricity + Internet connection has to appear.
Many people who tried, "Living on Love" alone tended to starve to death.
The people who tried, "Laying on My Back Moaning and Pretending Love"
tended to come down with a number of rather unpleasant sexually-transmitted
diseases with rather painful dripping sores.
The folks who tried, "Living Off A Spouse (in exchange for occasional
sex, perpetual whiny nagging, squandering money recklessly, and buying new
woman shoes every week)" tended to end up rather hated and no better off if
society was not geared to illegally financially-enslaving a man long after
the Marriage Contract was rendered null & void.
Curiosity is great. I believe most folks posting here are addicted to
learning (well at least READING about) new things regularly. There is a
whole universe out there that needs comprehension and boundless curiosity is
the only way to achieve that goal at a reasonable pace. It never hurts too
much to point good folks in the right directions for good answers. Be very
wary of the creeps that seek easy knowledge without the efforts to
understand that knowledge. Helping a person unfit to be a doctor pass
Medical School exams means that in the future the odds are very high that
many innocent people will be subject to an unfit physician's dangerous care
practices with a decent probability of easily preventable premature deaths
of many good people as a result of a far-too-helpful intelligent (but not
wise) person's meddling.
Thankfully the field of Data Compression rarely leads to mass-deaths of
good people as gross mathematical incompetence & inept programming tends to
guarantee zero financial success. This did not stop the Microsoft (too many
turds in the soup pot) Corporation from having their software lock up the
systems on an USA aircraft carrier though.
Terry Pratchett "The Importance of Being Amazed about Absolutely Everything"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2FZ_0d3yEI
'Belief' as according to Death
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnaQXJmpwM4
HEX-Hogfather
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN3tLnlixkY
A bit of one of our world's generation of great Philosopher-Comedians.
Be wary of what you wish for and unleash upon the world.
news:5f881966-aa08-4362...@vd8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> There can be other reasons to seek answers than money or emotion.
>
> There is a beauty in the Universe to behold and that itself is a
> reward.
>
> Just a thought.
hunt your own food, and have a clean water source, then somehow the money to
run the electricity + Internet connection has to appear.
Many people who tried, "Living on Love" alone tended to starve to death.
The people who tried, "Laying on My Back Moaning and Pretending Love"
tended to come down with a number of rather unpleasant sexually-transmitted
diseases with rather painful dripping sores.
The folks who tried, "Living Off A Spouse (in exchange for occasional
sex, perpetual whiny nagging, squandering money recklessly, and buying new
woman shoes every week)" tended to end up rather hated and no better off if
society was not geared to illegally financially-enslaving a man long after
the Marriage Contract was rendered null & void.
Curiosity is great. I believe most folks posting here are addicted to
learning (well at least READING about) new things regularly. There is a
whole universe out there that needs comprehension and boundless curiosity is
the only way to achieve that goal at a reasonable pace. It never hurts too
much to point good folks in the right directions for good answers. Be very
wary of the creeps that seek easy knowledge without the efforts to
understand that knowledge. Helping a person unfit to be a doctor pass
Medical School exams means that in the future the odds are very high that
many innocent people will be subject to an unfit physician's dangerous care
practices with a decent probability of easily preventable premature deaths
of many good people as a result of a far-too-helpful intelligent (but not
wise) person's meddling.
Thankfully the field of Data Compression rarely leads to mass-deaths of
good people as gross mathematical incompetence & inept programming tends to
guarantee zero financial success. This did not stop the Microsoft (too many
turds in the soup pot) Corporation from having their software lock up the
systems on an USA aircraft carrier though.
Terry Pratchett "The Importance of Being Amazed about Absolutely Everything"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2FZ_0d3yEI
'Belief' as according to Death
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnaQXJmpwM4
HEX-Hogfather
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN3tLnlixkY
A bit of one of our world's generation of great Philosopher-Comedians.
Be wary of what you wish for and unleash upon the world.
stan
Feb 8, 2012, 1:14:24 PM2/8/12
to
Ernst wrote:
> What may have been over looked is that Sebastian inserted the idea
> that I was trying to compress using factoring. I never wrote that I am
> trying to compress by factoring because I am not.
Are you using factoring as a preprocessing step in a compression
> What may have been over looked is that Sebastian inserted the idea
> that I was trying to compress using factoring. I never wrote that I am
> trying to compress by factoring because I am not.
scheme or are you simply posting off topic factoring threads in the
compressions newsgroup. From your words you claimed factoring was
attractive because is gave a longer string of bits (see below). You
never clearly stated what would happen next even when asked. So I ask
now. Does this factoring have anything to do with you compression
idea?
>
> As for the hash function design you have to admit that if all the
> results from recursive modulus are strung together it is an output of
> a long string of bits for an input of a small string of bits and that
> is the attraction.
> As for the hash function design you have to admit that if all the
> results from recursive modulus are strung together it is an output of
> a long string of bits for an input of a small string of bits and that
> is the attraction.
> The recursive modulus just added more complexity to the
> deliberations is all.
Those deliberations happened over a hundred years ago.
> deliberations is all.
Ernst
Feb 10, 2012, 7:58:58 PM2/10/12
to
If you don't like it go suck an egg.
Later.
Ernst
Feb 10, 2012, 8:15:15 PM2/10/12
to
On Feb 7, 6:27 pm, "George Johnson" <matri...@charter.net> wrote:
> "Ernst" <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> HEX-Hogfatherhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qN3tLnlixkY
obviously all about it's good to get the small social interaction when
it comes to the hobbies.
I am not befuddled and trying to find a path.
So I have to look into Pi now.
Here is what I have seen that I an considering adapting to generate
Pi in Hex base.
http://www.boo.net/~jasonp/pigjerr
It is strange in that I don't get the use of main(j) can the main
call itself recursively?
I just started looking at generating trans.. I don't intend to
philosophize Transcendental numbers but the more I thought about the
Torrent replacement project the more I thought I could index things in
a way that could be smaller than a source.
This is a theory I am now ready to explore. It is data compression
related so comp.compression folks can sleep easy tonight as I am not
violating the chastity of this forum
So uh.. I can save myself the reinventing the wheel with some C code
that generates Pi to N hex digits. Any C-code links with no strings
attached?
Thanks.
> "Ernst" <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>
> A bit of one of our world's generation of great Philosopher-Comedians.
> Be wary of what you wish for and unleash upon the world.
Cool.. Being isolated while I ponder the depths of what infinities are
> A bit of one of our world's generation of great Philosopher-Comedians.
> Be wary of what you wish for and unleash upon the world.
obviously all about it's good to get the small social interaction when
it comes to the hobbies.
I am not befuddled and trying to find a path.
So I have to look into Pi now.
Here is what I have seen that I an considering adapting to generate
Pi in Hex base.
http://www.boo.net/~jasonp/pigjerr
It is strange in that I don't get the use of main(j) can the main
call itself recursively?
I just started looking at generating trans.. I don't intend to
philosophize Transcendental numbers but the more I thought about the
Torrent replacement project the more I thought I could index things in
a way that could be smaller than a source.
This is a theory I am now ready to explore. It is data compression
related so comp.compression folks can sleep easy tonight as I am not
violating the chastity of this forum
So uh.. I can save myself the reinventing the wheel with some C code
that generates Pi to N hex digits. Any C-code links with no strings
attached?
Thanks.
stan
Feb 10, 2012, 9:31:19 PM2/10/12
to
Ernst wrote:
> On Feb 8, 10:14 am, stan <smo...@exis.net> wrote:
>>
>> Are you using factoring as a preprocessing step in a compression
>> scheme or are you simply posting off topic factoring threads in the
>> compressions newsgroup. From your words you claimed factoring was
>> attractive because is gave a longer string of bits (see below). You
>> never clearly stated what would happen next even when asked. So I ask
>> now. Does this factoring have anything to do with you compression
>> idea?
<snip>
> On Feb 8, 10:14 am, stan <smo...@exis.net> wrote:
>>
>> Are you using factoring as a preprocessing step in a compression
>> scheme or are you simply posting off topic factoring threads in the
>> compressions newsgroup. From your words you claimed factoring was
>> attractive because is gave a longer string of bits (see below). You
>> never clearly stated what would happen next even when asked. So I ask
>> now. Does this factoring have anything to do with you compression
>> idea?
> I am simply interacting for social gratification.
could be and I figured I was just missing it. So it's good to see you
don't actually have a plan or goal; I wasn't "missing" anything.
I do applaud your direct honesty in admitting your purpose is
trolling. It really is a time saver.
> If you don't like it go suck an egg.
what usenet is and is not will lead to your continued frustration and
will further erode both your manners and behavior.
I further predict that your barking orders at people will never lead
to any measureable result.
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 2:29:59 AM2/11/12
to
Pi has to repeat!~
Think about this: Given probability and domain sampling of say 64 bit
lengths but that is arbitrary,
Just how many times a 64bit pattern can be expressed is bounded.
Pi repeats!
Just thinking that is.
Robert Wessel
Feb 11, 2012, 2:53:41 AM2/11/12
to
selection of digits is obviously dependent on the based used to
represent Pi. In decimal, the first thousand digits of Pi contain:
0 - 93 times
1 - 116
2 - 103
3 - 102
4 - 93
5 - 97
6 - 94
7 - 95
8 - 101
9 - 106
In base 2**64, you'd need (a lot) more digits to see the repeats, but
they'll still be there.
But just like in decimal, this isn't a repetition in the pattern,
which is what's important. For example, the rational fraction 1/7 is:
.142857142857142857142857142857...
with the same six digit pattern repeating forever. There is *no* such
repetition in Pi.
It's expected that Pi ultimately contains all shorter sequences, in
whatever base you're computing it in, although I don't think that's
been proven. For example, at about 36,356,643 digits in, you'll find
the pattern 99999999, and then at 66,780,106, and so on. Eight
consecutive zero can be found 172,330,851 an then at 184,688,989, and
so on.
The (very) old idea that you could compress data by simply pointing to
the string in Pi is flawed because the pointer must, on average, be at
least as long as the string, and worse, since Pi is not very regular,
the distance into Pi needed to find the average string is rather
higher than an optimally constructed string, so the pointer needs to
longer than the string to be compressed.
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 2:38:36 AM2/11/12
to
> I'll go out on a limb with a prediction. Your lack of understanding of
> will further erode both your manners and behaviour.
>
> I further predict that your barking orders at people will never lead
> to any measurable result.
> I further predict that your barking orders at people will never lead
Hey Shit head, when you pay my bills I worry what you think.
The topic is Transcendentals'
NOTE: I am sick of the people that dog me.
Here to learn and sharing what is best.
Back on Pi.. has to repeat based on sample length.. I have to be
correct.
Truth ?
Thomas Richter
Feb 11, 2012, 8:50:53 AM2/11/12
to
On 11.02.2012 08:38, Ernst wrote:
>
>> I'll go out on a limb with a prediction. Your lack of understanding of
>> what Usenet is and is not will lead to your continued frustration and
>> will further erode both your manners and behaviour.
>>
>> I further predict that your barking orders at people will never lead
>> to any measurable result.
>
> Hey Shit head, when you pay my bills I worry what you think.
>
> The topic is Transcendentals'
No, the topic is compression.
>
>> I'll go out on a limb with a prediction. Your lack of understanding of
>> what Usenet is and is not will lead to your continued frustration and
>> will further erode both your manners and behaviour.
>>
>> I further predict that your barking orders at people will never lead
>> to any measurable result.
>
> Hey Shit head, when you pay my bills I worry what you think.
>
> The topic is Transcendentals'
> NOTE: I am sick of the people that dog me.
> Here to learn and sharing what is best.
>
> Back on Pi.. has to repeat based on sample length.. I have to be
> correct.
>
> Truth ?
which implies that it never repeats. The fact that Pi is irrational is
not hard to prove, it requires only elementary mathematics. Here is a
pointer to a book (yes, the stuff on paper!) that provides it:
"Aigner, Ziegler: The BOOK of Proofs" ( <-- actually, a pretty good
book, too)
Greetings,
Thomas
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 12:01:27 PM2/11/12
to
value.
Thanks a whole bunch fellahs. As for me needing to work
transcendental numbers my interest is way more practical.
alrighty-then I see the file backup hit a snag and what should have
been done now will take all of today.
Still open to input on C code for computing Pi but I do have time to
look again today.
I think I will see if that tinyPi.c will actually work. It's written
in a funny way to be small but I wonder if C will allow that sort of
thing.
Thanks for the input. Very helpful.
There is telling how this idea using Trans' will turn out. No claims
here except that I will try.
Ernst
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 12:08:50 PM2/11/12
to
I will use the transcendental number just as it is, in a practical
way.
No magic compression functions from Pi my friends.
I hope saying that will stop the howling dogs of comp.compression
from circling.
You and the guys are always so knowledgeable. It's worth taking on
all fighters here in this Gladiator school of data compression to have
a chat.
Ernst
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 12:20:00 PM2/11/12
to
On Feb 10, 6:31 pm, stan <smo...@exis.net> wrote:
Maybe someone will say you passed but who ever does will be attacked
as a Troll.
Where I get these bad manners is from here in comp.compression over
the last decade Stan.
This is a new strategy to get pas the folks that just have to fuck
with people in a smart way.
Like I said being educated doesn't exempt one from being human and
smart people like a fight like anyone else except smart people will
use their intelligence to hurt others and act like they did nothing
wrong thinking being smart is all they need.
Well to all those who feel it is their right to mess with people get
use to the idea that for a while i am trying a new approach here for
my 11th year of interacting here.
If we are all tired of it maybe we all will stop the crap? Right?
I have given years of following the "rules" here and you know what?
They are bent and twisted to fit the occasion. If someone is seen as
undesirable it's a party fro the rest of you guys. Well Guess what?
Those that don't take the time to phrase their issues in a general way
about topic and turn it personal get personal back.
So you choose to modify your behaviour dude because no one can change
the world but you can change yourself.
As for what happens to me or why i think as I do it is none of your
business get it?
So again I have a pile of bills here and you are welcome to them if
you want to show you care.
Ernst
stan
Feb 11, 2012, 12:29:45 PM2/11/12
to
Ernst wrote:
>
>> I'll go out on a limb with a prediction. Your lack of understanding of
>> what Usenet is and is not will lead to your continued frustration and
>> will further erode both your manners and behaviour.
>>
>> I further predict that your barking orders at people will never lead
>> to any measurable result.
>
> Hey Shit head, when you pay my bills I worry what you think.
Not that the prediction was difficult, but I did expect it might take longer.
>
>> I'll go out on a limb with a prediction. Your lack of understanding of
>> what Usenet is and is not will lead to your continued frustration and
>> will further erode both your manners and behaviour.
>>
>> I further predict that your barking orders at people will never lead
>> to any measurable result.
>
> Hey Shit head, when you pay my bills I worry what you think.
> The topic is Transcendentals'
Actually the topic is compression.
> Back on Pi.. has to repeat based on sample length.. I have to be
> correct.
fascinated for centuries but it won't help with compression.
stan
Feb 11, 2012, 12:46:38 PM2/11/12
to
Ernst wrote:
<snip>
> No magic compression functions from Pi my friends.
That actually goes without saying, it's pretty fundamental stuff.
> I hope saying that will stop the howling dogs of comp.compression
> from circling.
>
> You and the guys are always so knowledgeable. It's worth taking on
> all fighters here in this Gladiator school of data compression to have
> a chat.
Again, you really misunderstand usenet; this isn't a chat room.
1. The topic is compression.
2. Your ideas will be judged on their merits.
3. Your behavior will dictate how others respond.
Those aren't my ideas by the way.
<snip>
> No magic compression functions from Pi my friends.
> I hope saying that will stop the howling dogs of comp.compression
> from circling.
>
> You and the guys are always so knowledgeable. It's worth taking on
> all fighters here in this Gladiator school of data compression to have
> a chat.
1. The topic is compression.
2. Your ideas will be judged on their merits.
3. Your behavior will dictate how others respond.
Those aren't my ideas by the way.
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 12:49:59 PM2/11/12
to
Look at the complete effort.
You are upset because there is a mystery involved and for all the
prodding the best you can do is do a witchdoctor dance predicting my
defeat.
Let me make the perfectly clear. I am interested in Pi or other
irrationals simply for bit patterns and nothing else. So I can use Pi
or e or many others and I can use 2/3 and all sorts of others.
As to what it is a part of? At this point nothing because I am just
outlining the project. Once I work a while on things I'll have a
better idea of if it is wroth the effort to code or not.
Here is a soft and sincere paragraph below.
Most people that frequent this forum and post have the pattern of do
the math first and write the code second. It works and it's
reasonable. Other folks like myself have since day one written the
code and work on the math aspect. I use C language as my "math" so my
point of view is on the level of programming it and proving or
disproving the concept I was interested in.
So that is me friend. I am a hacker-type and I am rather good at it
after 20 years.
So for all concerned I will use the bit patterns as a data set.
I hope that meets with your approval.
Also I am sure since I code first and work the math as I go for what
is needed that I will once again bother you and others and I simply
don't care but if you do send money!
Ernst
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 1:21:11 PM2/11/12
to
-------------------------------------------
For the rest of you all.
tinyPi.c seems to work.
Here is the output :
141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128475648233786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648213393607260249141273724587006606315588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548820466521384146951941511609433057270365759591953092186117381932611793105118548074462379962749567351885752724891227938183011949129833673362440656643086021394946395224737190702179860943702770539217176293176752384674818467669405132000568127145263560827785771342757789609173637178721468440901224953430146549585371050792279689258923542019956112129021960864034418159813629774771309960518707211349999998372978049951059731732816096318595024459455346908302642522308253344685035261931188171010003137838752886587533208381420617177669147303598253490428755468731159562863882353787593751957781857780532171226806613001927876611195909216420198938
Here is the code. I wasn't worried about the stdio thing I believe
main(j) was about. I admit I have not thought that way.
So for my contribution to the discussion on Pi. From my level of
understanding. In a way that I am able. I a tone that is appropriate.
Here is tinyPi by Gjerrit Meinsma.
From g.me...@math.utwente.nl Mon Dec 11 00:32:03 2000
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 14:28:37 -0100
From: gjerrit meinsma <g.me...@math.utwente.nl>
To: jas...@isr.umd.edu
Subject: pishort.c
I've read your pi-pages and it seems
you have been busy with getting tiny code
for pi. That's interesting.
Perhaps you have comments on my little C-program.
It takes 141 characters, so not as much as the
"standard" calculate-pi.c program. Of course
it is not as tiny as the assembler code on your page.
It calculates 1000 decimals of pi (could easily do more)
in about two seconds:
long k=4e3,p,a[337],q,t=1e3;
main(j){for(;a[j=q=0]+=2,--k;)
for(p=1+2*k;j<337;q=a[j]*k+q%p*t,a[j++]=q/p)
k!=j>2?:printf("%.3d",a[j-2]%t+q/p/t);}
Groeten,
Gjerrit Meinsma.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Here is how I modified it to run under GCC C
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
main()
{
unsigned long long int j = 2000;
long k=4e3,p,a[337],q,t=1e3;
// main(j){
{ for(;a[j=q=0]+=2,--k;)
for(p=1+2*k;j<337;q=a[j]*k+q%p*t,a[j++]=q/p)
k!=j>2?:printf("%.3d",a[j-2]%t+q/p/t);}
}
/* tinyPi by gjerrit meinsma <g.me...@math.utwente.nl>
* long k=4e3,p,a[337],q,t=1e3;
* main(j){for(;a[j=q=0]+=2,--k;)
* for(p=1+2*k;j<337;q=a[j]*k+q%p*t,a[j++]=q/p)
* k!=j>2?:printf("%.3d",a[j-2]%t+q/p/t);}
*/
~
Lets see now if the output matches another list for Pi.
141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286
208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481
117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128475648233
786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648213393607260249141273724587006
606315588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548820466521384146
951941511609433057270365759591953092186117381932611793105118548074462379962749
567351885752724891227938183011949129833673362440656643086021394946395224737190
702179860943702770539217176293176752384674818467669405132
My old eyes think it does.
Any comments on tinyPi.c?
I think Gjerrit Meinsma is brilliant. I thought the recursive
modulus loop was tight but that is wonderfully tight code.
On the lingering topic of I am not worthy.. Get lost.
On the utility of discussing Pi at this time for me, priceless.
Thanks for this wonderful topic and may all who read this enjoy
Gjerrit Meinsma's tinyPi.c
Ernst
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 2:15:25 PM2/11/12
to
On Feb 11, 10:21 am, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
Hey friends..
I am looking at tinyPi.c and it seems to scale some but it doesn't
match up with a list off the internet of 100,000 digits of Pi for
runs longer than a couple thousand digits.
It could be my miss-understanding on how to scale that.
I may not be seeing the right way to scale that so I am open to
suggestions on tinyPi.c or other link.
Oh well it sure works for a few thousand digits that is true.
If anyone is able to scale that towards infinity I can stand some
advice.
Forget the j = 2000; I was simply initializing it for no good
reason.
Alrighty then..
Hey friends..
I am looking at tinyPi.c and it seems to scale some but it doesn't
match up with a list off the internet of 100,000 digits of Pi for
runs longer than a couple thousand digits.
It could be my miss-understanding on how to scale that.
I may not be seeing the right way to scale that so I am open to
suggestions on tinyPi.c or other link.
Oh well it sure works for a few thousand digits that is true.
If anyone is able to scale that towards infinity I can stand some
advice.
Forget the j = 2000; I was simply initializing it for no good
reason.
Alrighty then..
stan
Feb 11, 2012, 2:30:52 PM2/11/12
to
Ernst wrote:
> I predict you will die and no one here will ask where you went.
> Maybe someone will say you passed but who ever does will be attacked
> as a Troll.
Your concern and threat noted appropriately.
> I predict you will die and no one here will ask where you went.
> Maybe someone will say you passed but who ever does will be attacked
> as a Troll.
> Where I get these bad manners is from here in comp.compression over
> the last decade Stan.
behavior. Accepting responsibility is a choice.
<snip>
> Well to all those who feel it is their right to mess with people get
> use to the idea that for a while i am trying a new approach here for
> my 11th year of interacting here.
> As for what happens to me or why i think as I do it is none of your
> business get it?
don't care about you. You continue to take things personally. I've
asked you to clarify your ideas and plans regarding compression with
no response. The attacks you perceive don't exist. On the other hand
your attempts to provoke or engage in off topic idle chit chat are
doomed.
stan
Feb 11, 2012, 3:05:12 PM2/11/12
to
Ernst wrote:
>> Or what? Sadly, you're walking a very well worn path, PI has
>> fascinated for centuries but it won't help with compression.
>
> Look at yourself.
> Look at the complete effort.
>
> You are upset because there is a mystery involved and for all the
> prodding the best you can do is do a witchdoctor dance predicting my
> defeat.
You misunderstand, I am not upset. Second, if math seems like magic
>> Or what? Sadly, you're walking a very well worn path, PI has
>> fascinated for centuries but it won't help with compression.
>
> Look at yourself.
> Look at the complete effort.
>
> You are upset because there is a mystery involved and for all the
> prodding the best you can do is do a witchdoctor dance predicting my
> defeat.
and witch doctoring to you I can only suggest some reading.
> Let me make the perfectly clear. I am interested in Pi or other
> irrationals simply for bit patterns and nothing else. So I can use Pi
> or e or many others and I can use 2/3 and all sorts of others.
>
> As to what it is a part of? At this point nothing because I am just
> outlining the project. Once I work a while on things I'll have a
> better idea of if it is wroth the effort to code or not.
> Here is a soft and sincere paragraph below.
>
> Most people that frequent this forum and post have the pattern of do
> the math first and write the code second.
true. I dare say most here have experimented with ideas without
developing a complete formal math analysis before starting. That's
hardly how it ever works. Most of the time math is brought in because
there is an existing and large body of math relevant to
compression. Many ideas have been tried and reinvented in the past and
the record exists. Awareness of that record allows the knowledgeable
to avoid wasting time on well worn dead ends.
I mentioned this before; compression and math involve a finite number
of things and a finite number of possible operations. Given a
restricted universe it's possible to consider ALL possibilities in
many situations. IOW it's possible for math to prove some things will
never happen with no possible exceptions. To get around that you must
introduce new things (going beyond 1's and 0's or even numbers) or
inventing and precisely defining new operations.
> So for all concerned I will use the bit patterns as a data set.
> I hope that meets with your approval.
stan
Feb 11, 2012, 3:08:28 PM2/11/12
to
Ernst wrote:
>> Again, you really misunderstand usenet; this isn't a chat room.
>>
>> 1. The topic is compression.
>> 2. Your ideas will be judged on their merits.
>> 3. Your behavior will dictate how others respond.
>>
>> Those aren't my ideas by the way.
>
> Then explain yourself.
What's confusing you?
>> Again, you really misunderstand usenet; this isn't a chat room.
>>
>> 1. The topic is compression.
>> 2. Your ideas will be judged on their merits.
>> 3. Your behavior will dictate how others respond.
>>
>> Those aren't my ideas by the way.
>
> Then explain yourself.
stan
Feb 11, 2012, 3:14:40 PM2/11/12
to
Ernst wrote:
> On Feb 11, 10:21 am, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Oh well it sure works for a few thousand digits that is true.
> If anyone is able to scale that towards infinity I can stand some
> advice.
I would try a math group or even a math faq for current ideas on how
> On Feb 11, 10:21 am, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Oh well it sure works for a few thousand digits that is true.
> If anyone is able to scale that towards infinity I can stand some
> advice.
to generate digits of pi. I didn't verify but I seem to remember
something in Numerical Recipes (a book).
Robert Wessel
Feb 11, 2012, 5:01:44 PM2/11/12
to
arithmetic-geometric mean function (AGM) is the preferred approach:
// Gauss' AGM to compute Pi
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <math.h>
int main()
{
int i;
double a, b, c, s, t, pi;
a = 1;
b = 1/sqrt(2.0);
s = .5;
for (i=1; i<10; i++)
{
t = a;
a = (a+b)/2;
b = sqrt(t*b);
c = (a-t)*(a-t);
s = s-(c*pow(2,i));
// following two lines only needed after last iteration
pi = (a+b)*(a+b)/(2*s);
printf("iteration %i, pi=%.16f\n", i, pi);
}
return 0;
}
Obviously the actual operations need to be done with a bignum library
(excise left to the reader), but this is very, very fast as these
things go. The number of accurate digits of Pi basically double each
iteration through the loop, and 40 iterations will get you over a 1.3
trillion digits. The code above using a double hits the limits of a
double after three iterations.
The Schönhage variant is slightly faster, and uses less storage, but
is a little more complex to understand in terms of the
arithmetic-geometric mean function
// Schönhage variant of Gauss' AGM to compute Pi
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <math.h>
int main()
{
int i;
double a, b, A, B, s, t, pi;
a = 1;
A = 1;
B = .5;
s = .5;
for (i=1; i<10; i++)
{
t = (A+B)/4;
b = sqrt(B);
a = (a+b)/2;
A = a*a;
B = (A-t)*2;
s = s+((B-A)*pow(2,i));
// following two lines only needed after last iteration
pi = (A+B)/s;
printf("iteration %i, pi=%.16f\n", i, pi);
}
return 0;
}
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 5:24:07 PM2/11/12
to
11th year but I already told you that.
The reason for my visit at this point is to drop the request of code
examples.
I have adapted tinyPi to suit my current needs.
Interesting algorithm. I certainly don't think of programming that
way. It's a head scratcher that also seems so tight it doesn't like
change. Eh whoo...
So Stan the man why don't we get a pint and talk things over.. I bet
once you accept me as a human being your whole perspective will
change.
Okay friends. I have nothing further on Transcendentals' of the ilk.
Thanks
Ernst
Ernst
Feb 11, 2012, 5:34:24 PM2/11/12
to
I have tucked your example away for now. I do wish to have proper
Transcendental numbers in time so knowing how to generate Pi,e and
more I read is important; however, what I am more interested in is a
large array of data to use a data set. tinyPi is small,fast and at
this point adapted to generate a data set.
tinyPi seems to fail at some distance but it dose generate enough
data and I can do the development of this program with it even if it
isn't truly Pi. It's not critical.
Again Thank You. These are simple topics for some but I have never
looked into generating such data in earnest before.
I am not saying I will compress anything but I have an idea that may
do such a thing. I do not know until I get further along with the
program writing.
So in case anyone is worried this is for a data compression effort.
First comes the data encoding then we shall see what kind of encoding
it is.
A wise person here told me a long time ago that data compression is
just a class of data encoding where the encoded is smaller than the
source.
So we all must open our eyes to all types of data encoding and some
of it cannot be called compression and it is not a sin.
Ernst
George Johnson
Feb 11, 2012, 9:08:38 PM2/11/12
to
"Ernst" <Ernst...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:b4e6a68b-aa74-4041...@ub4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
prefer.
Copy that to a text editor with a FIND & REPLACE function.
Now do the following.
FIND & REPLACE (numbers to letters)
0 with A
1 with B
2 with C
3 with D
4 with E
5 with F
6 with G
7 with H
8 with I
9 with J
Now you should have a nice alphabet soup of letters (so you can do a
clean FIND & REPLACE with new number combos).
Now FIND & REPLACE
A with 23
B with 1172
C with 9
D with 40
E with 5
F with 7
G with 0
H with 3
I with 8
J with 6634
Now you can replace with different numbers (I'm not stopping you, no
really I have no power to stop you in the slightest). Note that the
randomness distribution of the square root of 2 remains identical even with
the increase of certain digits. In fact, now it will appear to have a bias
in favor of the extra 1's, 3's, 7's, 6's, & 0's, but the simple truth is
that the number you have ran a FIND & REPLACE upon remains just as random as
the original square root of 2.
Reversing my suggested FIND & REPLACE routine will simply make my
swapout revert the new number set.
Now what happens if you run this routine on another "random" number set?
You know that you can revert a number to 1 only if you have a sequence of
1172, any other shorter sequence or differing sequence will yield incorrect
results.
George Johnson
Feb 11, 2012, 9:14:06 PM2/11/12
to
"stan" <smo...@exis.net> wrote in message news:u4mi09-...@invalid.net...
In an ideal world.
On the other hand, throwing potatoes is mighty enjoyable.
It teaches good dodging skills, excellent catching skills, and the
ability to have a potato dinner if you remember that potatoes are food.
The Renaissance Period of the Internet is sadly being forced to a close
rather soon though.
Soon we will all have to admit identities, be forced to be polite or be
fined, and lie regularly under the threat of being jailed in a once free
society.
Folks tend to be brutally honest and wonderful with there is an element
of mystery.
You kids won't really appreciate this blessing until it is gone for
good.
On the other hand, throwing potatoes is mighty enjoyable.
It teaches good dodging skills, excellent catching skills, and the
ability to have a potato dinner if you remember that potatoes are food.
The Renaissance Period of the Internet is sadly being forced to a close
rather soon though.
Soon we will all have to admit identities, be forced to be polite or be
fined, and lie regularly under the threat of being jailed in a once free
society.
Folks tend to be brutally honest and wonderful with there is an element
of mystery.
You kids won't really appreciate this blessing until it is gone for
good.
Ernst
Feb 12, 2012, 1:31:01 AM2/12/12
to
On Feb 11, 6:08 pm, "George Johnson" <matri...@charter.net> wrote:
> "Ernst" <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
My Bad...
I have not followed your random example yet I can believe it from
reading.
I thought to share the code I adapted to generate a 999 hex digit
data set.
Here is what I have. No verification to Pi has been made. No
warranty. Data is simply an expression of my modifications. It is not
fit for any purpose and therefore do not use it unless you accept all
responsibility for any and all results.
Start
------------
// Code from tinyPi gjerrit meinsma <g.me...@math.utwente.nl>
// Start tinyPi adaption
//999 hex digits
x=0;String[0]=0;
{ k!=j>2?:sprintf(&String[0],"%.3d",a[j-2]%t+q/p/t);
if(String[0] != 0) { Data_Set[x++] = atoi(String); String[0]=0; }
}
for(y=0;y<x;y+=3){ sprintf(&String[y],"%.3X",Data_Set[y]); }
printf("%s\n",String);
// End tinyPi adaption
=======
End
999 digit hex string :
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
Ernst
> "Ernst" <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
I have not followed your random example yet I can believe it from
reading.
I thought to share the code I adapted to generate a 999 hex digit
data set.
Here is what I have. No verification to Pi has been made. No
warranty. Data is simply an expression of my modifications. It is not
fit for any purpose and therefore do not use it unless you accept all
responsibility for any and all results.
Start
------------
// Code from tinyPi gjerrit meinsma <g.me...@math.utwente.nl>
// Start tinyPi adaption
//999 hex digits
x=0;String[0]=0;
for(;a[j=q=0]+=2,--k;)
for(p=1+2*k;j<1000;q=a[j]*k+q%p*t,a[j++]=q/p)
{ k!=j>2?:sprintf(&String[0],"%.3d",a[j-2]%t+q/p/t);
if(String[0] != 0) { Data_Set[x++] = atoi(String); String[0]=0; }
}
for(y=0;y<x;y+=3){ sprintf(&String[y],"%.3X",Data_Set[y]); }
printf("%s\n",String);
// End tinyPi adaption
=======
End
999 digit hex string :
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
Ernst
Noob
Feb 16, 2012, 5:28:11 AM2/16/12
to
Thomas Richter wrote:
> Pi is transcendental, which implies that it is not rational,
> which implies that it never repeats.
Other references:
> Pi is transcendental, which implies that it is not rational,
> which implies that it never repeats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_number
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendental_number
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrational
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindemann%E2%80%93Weierstrass_theorem#Transcendence_of_e_and_.CF.80
Ernst
Apr 15, 2012, 9:13:32 PM4/15/12
to
On Sunday, February 5, 2012 12:08:02 PM UTC-8, Mark Nelson wrote:
> For some reason Google Groups stopped sending me daily digests from
> comp.compression. The fact that it took me a month to notice is
> interesting all in itself.
>
> Ernst is working on trying to factor the million digit number.
>
> As I've mentioned before, if the million digit number just happened to
> be prime, it would probably result in a win for someone. The prime
> number theorem says that the number of primes below 10^1000000 is
> 4.3*10^999993.
>
> This means the prime can be denoted by a number that saves six+ digits
> over the million digit file.
>
> Feed that number into a computational engine that has two
> instructions: 1) calculate prime n, 2) print result
>
> And you have defeated the million digit file by four bytes. I would
> definitely count it as a win.
>
> But this unlikely result brings up the more important question: why do
> attempts to use factoring, combinatorial techniques, and mathematical
> series inevitably result in derision in this NG?
>
> Mostly because they have no track record. And they have no track
> record because they don't usually produce useful results.
>
> The interesting data that we want to compress is based on human
> language and perception - even executable code is based on human
> language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
> useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
> more fractally than arithmeticy.
>
> From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
> really found anything interesting down these paths.
>
> If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
> mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
> not.
>
> If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
> might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
> get there.
>
> - Mark
Swell, we all have lapses and we all thing we advance because of something..
So are you back in the saddle or is this proof you are still a bit delayed? :)
> For some reason Google Groups stopped sending me daily digests from
> comp.compression. The fact that it took me a month to notice is
> interesting all in itself.
>
> Ernst is working on trying to factor the million digit number.
>
> As I've mentioned before, if the million digit number just happened to
> be prime, it would probably result in a win for someone. The prime
> number theorem says that the number of primes below 10^1000000 is
> 4.3*10^999993.
>
> This means the prime can be denoted by a number that saves six+ digits
> over the million digit file.
>
> Feed that number into a computational engine that has two
> instructions: 1) calculate prime n, 2) print result
>
> And you have defeated the million digit file by four bytes. I would
> definitely count it as a win.
>
> But this unlikely result brings up the more important question: why do
> attempts to use factoring, combinatorial techniques, and mathematical
> series inevitably result in derision in this NG?
>
> Mostly because they have no track record. And they have no track
> record because they don't usually produce useful results.
>
> The interesting data that we want to compress is based on human
> language and perception - even executable code is based on human
> language. And in that domain, factoring and combinations don't produce
> useful results, nor is it likely they will. The data domain is kind of
> more fractally than arithmeticy.
>
> From time to time there might be crossovers, but AFAIK nobody has
> really found anything interesting down these paths.
>
> If we were trying to compress, say, data generated by automota with a
> mathematical bent, it might be a completely different story. But we're
> not.
>
> If someone found a way to transform one domain to the other, then we
> might really see something. But it seems like a pretty big problem to
> get there.
>
> - Mark
Swell, we all have lapses and we all thing we advance because of something..
So are you back in the saddle or is this proof you are still a bit delayed? :)
0 new messages