Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai.alife
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!csulb.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!news.mathworks.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: rand() - implementation ideas [Q]
Message-ID: <jqbE05zJw.BAK@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <54lr8o$ndm@nntp.seflin.lib.fl.us> <557a4i$s2e@zen.hursley.ibm.com> <3277822a.0@news.iea.net> <P1ZDtGA4sIeyEwCM@wandana.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 23:50:19 GMT
Lines: 13
Sender: jqb@netcom23.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:41805 comp.ai.philosophy:48093 comp.ai.alife:6778

In article <P1ZDtGA4sIeyEwCM@wandana.demon.co.uk>,
>I would go so far as to say ALL large patterns CAN be compressed even when NO
>global pattern can be found, simply because if you take small enough local
>sections of the stream, there are bound to be repeating groups;  These repeating
>groups MAY be reverse engineered to create an algorithm.....

There is a fallacy here.  I suggest you check out the comp.compression FAQ.
The number of sequences that can be expressed in n bits is 2**n.  Any
algorithm that compresses some to a smaller number of bits will necessarily
expand others to a greater number of bits.
-- 
<J Q B>

