On Friday 06 March 2015 03:24:48 Abhiram R wrote: > > A list of 100 elements has approximately 9.33 x 10**157 > > permutations. If you could somehow generate one permutation every > > yoctosecond, exhausting them would still take more than a hundred > > orders of magnitude longer than the age of the universe. > > -- > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > > True that :D I may have exaggerated on the number. Let's consider > something more practically manageable => 50 elements with a 50! > permutation. > Is there a solution now?
Yes, but its now only 8.881784197e+84 elements so it is still not a practical target. Doing all elements of a matrix is generally equ to n!, and 50 raised to the 50th power is still a number that will probably use up this suns remaining lifetime doing it in assembly. If submitted and accepted to BOINC with its parallelism potential. And Seagate/Western Digital's combined output for about that same time to store the result. I'd choose any other, perhaps less exhaustive method. Or a more practical size of dataset parameters. > -Abhiram.R > *~Never give up* Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene> -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
