Den lördagen den 2:e november 2013 kl. 22:31:09 UTC+1 skrev Tim Roberts: > jonas.thornv...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >Well then i have news for you. > > > > Well, then, why don't you share it? > > > > Let me try to get you to understand WHY what you say is impossible. Let's > > say you do have a function f(x) that can produce a compressed output y for > > any given x, such that y is always smaller than x. If that were true, then > > I could call f() recursively: > > f(f(...f(f(f(f(f(x)))))...)) > > and eventually the result get down to a single bit. I hope it is clear > > that there's no way to restore a single bit back into different source > > texts. > > > > Here's another way to look at it. If f(x) is smaller than x for every x, > > that means there MUST me multiple values of x that produce the same f(x). > > Do you see? If x is three bits and f(x) is two bits, that means there are > > 8 possible values for x but only 4 values for f(x). So, given an f(x), you > > cannot tell which value of x it came from. You have lost information. > > -- > > Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com > > Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
Well let me try to explain why it is working and i have implemented one. I only need to refresh my memory it was almost 15 years ago. This is not the solution but this is why it is working. 65536=256^2=16^4=***4^8***=2^16 Yes i am aware that 256 is a single byte 8 bits, but the approach is valid anyway. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
