quote: Original post by ga
Overlapping patterns are counted, too.

You mean that for every 1111 you get two 111''s counted? That can''t be good... at least with the method I was doing on paper. They all have to be counted consecutively, but perhaps with an bit offset of up to the byte size minus one. But still consecutively.

Anyway, if it was done all in order, with those numbers you could compress it 10%. But it wasn''t. Do you have a program that counts only consecutively? (It''d run a lot faster, too.)

quote:
It''s not completely random, the frequencies of the 3 bit patterns 000 and 111 differ about 1/6, but that''s not for the most-frequent-word compression.

So you''re saying not all compressed data is random?

Whoa! An 18! Almost didn''t catch that.

Vet: I think I can agree with what you''re saying. But with ga''s numbers (maybe- I don''t like this overlapping business), compressed data is not random, and so the uncompressables wouldn''t be anything you''d ever need to compress anyway.

Thanks for the wishes.


Lack

Christianity, Creation, metric, Dvorak, and BeOS for all!

YO POST THE GOSH DARN LINK!!!!! FOR THE GOSH DARN COMPRESSION DEMO!!!!!!!!

This Post Is Part Of The Einstein Is Da Man Sub-Thread
(it is also quite long)

ga - I think we may be having a little language problem. From your website I think your from Germany. Was ist los? (if I remember (doubtful) the little German I used to know that means ''What''s happening!''). So let me see if I get you right. When you say ''most time passes'' you are saying ''more time passes'', i.e. the person experiencing ''most time passing'' is having time past faster than say a stationary observer. I will quote and then try to resay what you wrote so we can make sure we are on the same polygon.

Secondly, its been awhile since I almost went astrophysics instead of computers in college so my thinking is a bit rough on this subject.

Now to your last 2 posts.

ga wrote:
-milo, people in orbit are "freely falling": The acceleration results of the curvature of the space-time. And on freely falling systems most time passes.-

-and-

ga wrote:
-In special relativity there are inertial systems, in general relativity they''re substituted by freely falling systems. So you''re nearly in free fall when you jump out of the window. And theorie of relativity says that most time passes on freely falling systems relative to not freely falling ones. So you''ll stay younger not jumping out of the window. You can''t determine if you''re in free fall or if there''s no gravitation field and you''re not accelerating, excepts with the tidal forces.-

For clarity I will now try to restate both of these.

Is the following what you are saying in the first quote?
Objects in orbit are in free fall. The object''s acceleration is a product of the space-time continuum. Objects in free fall are travelling forward in time faster (relativistically) than a stationary object.

Is the following the main idea you are saying in the second quote?
Objects in free fall are moving forward in time faster than objects not in free fall. If you throw one object out a window and it free falls to the ground it will be older than an object that you did not throw out the window. The state of object being in free fall is indistinguishable from an envrionment with no gravity and not acclerating due to its own power except by measuring tidal forces on the object.

A quote from a paper published in 1907 by Da Man himself.
"... we shall therefore assume the complete physical equivalence of a gravitational field and the corresponding acceleration of the reference frame. This assumption extends the principle of relativity to the case of uniformly accelerated motion of the reference frame."

We can all agree with that, can''t we?

And now the thought problem.

Imagine our universe empty of all matter except for 3 objects.

Object 1 is a very large black hole.

Object 2 is 1 million of a highly fissionable material
orbiting the black hole at 1 million miles.

Object 3 is 1 million atoms of the same highly fissionable material orbiting the black hole at 10 million miles.

The fissionable material has a half-life of 30.000 years. As atoms of the fissionable material decay they become a copy of all data in the universe compressed by kieren_j''s algorithm written on the surface of 1 atom of lead(SEE! We''re still on topic! ). At 30,000 years there will be approximately 500,000 atoms of the original material (watch out! its highly fissionable!) and 500.000 lead atoms that are the ultimate in cheat sheets.

Both object 2 and object 3 are in free fall.

When object 2 has decayed 1/2 of the original atoms, will there be more or less than 1/2 of the original atoms in object 3? My understanding says the answer is less since more time has passed for object 3 relative to object 2.

Same thought problem with 1 change.

Object 1 is a planet with a surface that is exactly 1 million miles from the center of the mass of the planet and the total mass of this planet is the same as the black hole in the first version of this problem (yeah, thats impossible).

Object 2 is sitting on the surface of the planet now and is not in free fall. (Or is it?)

What is the answer to the question now. My understanding is that there is no difference. Object 3 is still passing thru time faster than object 2.

So if your right there must be something wrong in my understanding of this thought problem (a version of the black hole and twins paradox). Please illuminate me.

Mike Roberts
aka milo
mlbobs@telocity.com

by the by
Remember that acceleration is counted in meter per second a second (m/s^2).Also you must relize that the change in time and space is relitive to the observer (hence the name) such that the dialation effect is relitive to the observed point so that if I accelerate past you in space to me YOU are moving and your time frame is changeing and mine is not, but to you it is I that has a changeing time reference. BUT!!! nether of us experience a time dialation!! why?? because our time frames are not in conflict (our motion doesnt "bleed" into our time reference) but if you where to change dirrection then your time-space frame would be in conflict with mine hence YOUR change would cause a time dialation for you (you would take longer and longer to get back in time). but the interesting thing about this is it is not the traveling at faster and faster rates that does it (we are all moving in space at a HIGH rate of speed) but the CHANGE of this said direction that causes a change in your time frame. since we are all in the universe and our galaxy is constantly moving and parts of it are in rotation (with us in it) and we are also moving in our solar system, is it this constant changing of direction in relation to some "fixed" galactic point that causes what we perceive as "time"? this is just the rantings of a high school student who is a geek and BORED with chem class though so, EH! I could be of my gourd but hey what was Einstien, (pronounced god, with a small "g") doing in a patent office with his free time? thanks for listening to ramblings.

I have always been lost!

Well here is another dose of brain food.
I got a question for you, why is it that a nueron can only be firing or not firing, and there is only 5 billion or so but the brain is rated at a couple teragig's? the answer is that it's not the bits that are on or off perse' but the patterns of bits that appear in before said cells, so in other words the patterns are what represent the information not the individual bits it is like a electrical circuit, the electrons don't represent the info it is the state of the transistors in the memory units that represent the data.

I have always been lost!

Edited by - MadHack on 4/20/00 11:01:05 PM

milo, you say
"Objects in free fall are moving forward in time faster than objects not in free fall. If you throw one object out a window and it free falls to the ground it will be older than an object that you did not throw out the window. The state of object being in free fall is indistinguishable from an envrionment with no gravity and not acclerating due to its own power except by measuring tidal forces on the object."
and that''s what I mean!


"Object 1 is a planet with a surface that is exactly 1 million miles from the center of the mass of the planet and the total mass of this planet is the same as the black hole in the first version of this problem (yeah, thats impossible).

Object 2 is sitting on the surface of the planet now and is not in free fall. (Or is it?)

What is the answer to the question now. My understanding is that there is no difference. Object 3 is still passing thru time faster than object 2."

There is a difference. It''s true that acceleration is the same as being in a gravitation field without acceleration.
In your first universe, Object 2 and 3 are both free falling and no object passes faster through time. And it''s a difference if you''re free falling or not. Free falling objects describe geodesists (I hope this is the right word) in space-time. Forgive me my bad english (I''m from Austria)!

Lack, you say you could compress my arj 10 %. If you can do this, it''s much less than kieren''s compression ratio.
btw, "It''s not completely random, the frequencies of the 3 bit patterns 000 and 111 differ about 1/6, but that''s not enough for the most-frequent-word compression." I wanted to write in one of my lasts posts.
The arj was a compressed text file with ca. 2 MB, most characters being ''0'' or ''1''. ARJ compressed it to ca. 15 %, but usually it should be possible to compress it to nearly 12.5% (1/8).

Visit our homepage: www.rarebyte.de.st

GA

All I was trying to show is that compressed data can be recompressed because it''s not random. But I can''t even use your numbers, from what I understand, because you said it even counts overlapping patterns. Does this mean:

11111111

When counted by your program returns 6 for the number of ''111'' occurences? With my one method it''d only be 2.

And Vet, here''s how the masking can give good results:

You take a string of random data, where the ones and zeros occur an equal number of times, and break it into bytes of three (or 4 or 5 etc) bits each. You then look at the first bit of every byte, and the second, and the third. There will be an imbalance somewhere, no matter how random the file is. But since you have an equal number of 0''s and 1''s, you now have to have another imbalance to counter the first one. Like for one string I got:

(4-bit bytes)
1s 0s
1st bit 8 10
2nd bit 8 10
3rd bit 9 9
4th bit 11 7

So I masked with ##CD (where ABCD''s the original and # reverses the bit), and now you have more ones than zeros, which you agree makes things more compressable.


Lack

Christianity, Creation, metric, Dvorak, and BeOS for all!

quote: Original post by Dan Smith

How are people still posting to this thread while its closed?

Easy. They don''t know it''s closed! Gimme a harder riddle next time!


How did we get onto the subject of quantum physics here? Does it take that much knowledge to show that kieren''s compression is just another ZONTAR? You people just don''t know when to quit talking... At least you''re studying compression in a semi-logical way... Oh, by the way, with all of these miracle compression programs floating around, can someone send one my way? I need to compress 24-bit bitmaps by at least 75%.


- null_pointer
Sabre Multimedia

quote: Original post by null_pointer

Original post by Dan Smith

How are people still posting to this thread while its closed?

Easy. They don''t know it''s closed! Gimme a harder riddle next time!


How did we get onto the subject of quantum physics here? Does it take that much knowledge to show that kieren''s compression is just another ZONTAR? You people just don''t know when to quit talking… At least you''re studying compression in a semi-logical way… Oh, by the way, with all of these miracle compression programs floating around, can someone send one my way? I need to compress 24-bit bitmaps by at least 75%.


- null_pointer
Sabre Multimedia



We don''t talk much about quantum physics, more about theory of relativity. Maybe we talk about it because we get bored talking about impossible compression algorithms ;-)

Visit our homepage: www.rarebyte.de.st

GA

Lack - Post results after you have finished coding. Don''t make the same mistakes Kieren did.


Mike