Den måndagen den 4:e november 2013 kl. 15:27:19 UTC+1 skrev Dave Angel: > On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 05:53:28 -0800 (PST), jonas.thornv...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > Den lördagen den 2:e november 2013 kl. 22:31:09 UTC+1 skrev Tim > > Roberts: > > > > 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), y= > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot tell which value of x it came from. You have lost > > information. > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > And e ^ (I * pi) == -1 > > So what. ? >
e is an approximation... and your idea is not general for any n. > > Better file that patent, before the patent office realizes the > > analogy to the perpetual motion machine. > > > > -- > > DaveA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list