On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 4:23 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 12/28/2013 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > For a long time I got opponent saying that we cannot generate > computationally a random number, and that is right, if we want generate > only that numbers. but a simple counting algorithm generating all numbers, > 0, 1, 2, .... 6999500235148668, ... generates all random finite > incompressible strings, > > > How can a finite string be incompressible? 6999500235148668 in base > 6999500235148669 is just 10. > It took you 2 more digits to represent that number in that way. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.