Re: Confirmation of Shannon's Mistake about Perfect Secrecy of One-time-pad

On 11 7 , 11 45 , William Hughes <wpihug...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 7, 10:15 am, wangyong <hell...@xxxxxxx> wrote:





On 11 7 , 8 53 , William Hughes <wpihug...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 7, 7:38 am, wangyong <hell...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

i consider C fixed, k uniform, regardless P prior

This assumption is only correct if
P is uniform.

So any conclusion you draw from this
assumption will be correct only if
P is uniform.

If P is not unform, the conclusion that
P is uniform is incorrect.

So there is no contradiction between
the incorrect conclusion that P
is uniform and the fact that P
is not uniform.

- William Hughes

i consider C fixed, k uniform, regardless P prior
This assumption is only correct if
P is uniform.
====it is This assumption to get the result that
P is uniform.

An assumption that "get[s] the result" that
P is uniform is only correct if P is uniform.
If P is not uniform the assumption is incorrect.

So any conclusion you draw from this
assumption will be correct only if
P is uniform.
==i just get P is uniform

And this is only correct if P is uniform.



If P is not unform, the conclusion that
P is uniform is incorrect.
So there is no contradiction between
the incorrect conclusion that P
is uniform and the fact that P
is not uniform.

==========they are obvious contradiction.

No

An *incorrect* conclusion that P is uniform
does not contradict the fact the P is not uniform.

- William Hughes



- -

- -- -

- -

what i say is results get from imperfect conditions are inconsistant,
then the perfect result under perfect condition should be a compromise
of the results get from imperfect conditions .
that is also to say, it is not proper to insist posterior pribability
of P = prior. just like you insist K is uniform.
you can see detail in my paper "relavity of probability"
t

.

Relevant Pages