Re: More of an Algorithems question
- From: Dave Seaman <dseaman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 17:21:45 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:15:12 -0500, quasi wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 15:07:58 GMT, cri@xxxxxxxx (Richard Harter) wrote:
>>On 15 Nov 2005 14:55:51 -0800, "Filter" <filtermedialtd@xxxxxxxxx>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>How can I proove that no Algorithm can compress every file of length
>>>10^6?
>>
>>However there is an algorithm that will losslessly compress every file
>>of length 10^6 except one.
>>
> I don't believe that.
> The pigeonhole principle applies easily to invalidate such a claim ...
> Let n=10^6.
> There are 2^n possible files with n bits, but only 2^(n-1) files with
> n-1 bits. Hence, at most half the files can be compressed.
There are 2^n-1 files with fewer than n bits. Hence, the claim stands.
--
Dave Seaman
Judge Yohn's mistakes revealed in Mumia Abu-Jamal ruling.
<http://www.commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=228>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: More of an Algorithems question
- From: quasi
- Re: More of an Algorithems question
- References:
- More of an Algorithems question
- From: Filter
- Re: More of an Algorithems question
- From: Richard Harter
- Re: More of an Algorithems question
- From: quasi
- More of an Algorithems question
- Prev by Date: Re: stabilizer?
- Next by Date: Re: Well Ordering the Reals
- Previous by thread: Re: More of an Algorithems question
- Next by thread: Re: More of an Algorithems question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|