What about windowing the data? Only utilize a certain portion of it at a
time. It would be highly complex, although I don't see why a computer
couldn't keep track of it.
Is there anyone who can do any theoretical calculations on what this would
gain for us?
-Chuck
On Sun, 7 Mar 1999, Clayton Smith wrote:
> >Yes, it would take an enormous amount of RAM to do this, but what if we
> >stored the data in some kind of compressed format (a ZILLION to 1
> >compression???), or some kind of reference format? Then we could take
> >advantage of everyone's clock cycles used on other searches. There's got
> >to be a way of virtually referencing somthing that is not able to exist.
> >Look at the way we use a MOD instead of the actual number.
> >
> >Just some ramblings...
>
>
> If we compressed the data by any constant factor (e.g. a zillion), the
> amount of data to be stored would still double with each squaring, so we'd
> be not much better off.
>
> Suppose we had sufficient memory available to do the computation. How long
> would it take? Assume we've discovered something better than FFT and can
> multiply in O(n) time (as far as I know, this is the best that can be done
> since you have to at least look at the whole number). Each S(n) is twice
> the length of the previous one, and the squarings would take O(2^n) time. 1
> + 2 + 2^2 + ... 2^(n-1) = 2^n, so the whole computation would take O(2^n)
> time. That's a lot of time! And of course, actually dividing M(n) into
> S(n-2) would take just about as long.
>
> - Clayton
>
>
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: WWW: http://www.silverlink.net/poke : Boycott Microsot :
: E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.vcnet.com/bms :
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
