Julian Leviston wrote: > > This is essentially what I refer to when I talk about "planck size" of > algorithms. You can't get any simpler than a certain size and therefore not > only is it incredibly understandable, it simply won't break. > >
Say we have a Maximum Length Sequence constructed using a shift register of length N and a series of XOR gates. The MLS has a series of 2^N-1 states. Imagine, now, that the states are interpreted as byte code in some language. As an inverse problem, it may be possible to find a shift register "factorisation" for a given algorithm implemented in byte code. I would argue that the reduced information size (N + XOR gate encoding) is not understandable, although it would be very small. This is, of course, analogous to symbol representation and compression in information theory. A very information dense (compressed) communication becomes indistinguishable from noise. How do you determine that a very dense program is, in fact, understandable? _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
