The PERFECT EQUATION = LOSSLESS COMPRESSION!!!! TRUE!!!!

There has been a tremendous breaktrough equation at
adamsplatform.com.au. It is quite simple the form content and
behaviour of matter summarised in NE EQUATIN -A PERFECT EQUATIN for
an imperfect time! ITS TIME FR THE PERFECT WRLD F PERFECT CMPUTING
- IMAGINE THE PSSIBILITIES WITH THIS SLE EQUATIN ENABLING
EVERYTING????

I am the Jackal and I will return with the story behind this
BREAKTHRUGH ANNUNCEMENT in two weeks time!!!!

adamsplatform.com.au = perfect computing equation now in "original"
owners handwriting!

i like the " pk = ? "

that's totally lossless, when you don't have any definition already,
there's nothing to lose! :)

jacko wrote:

>Then your future direction is obvious: Stop making claims.
>
So are you claiming that I should stop making claims in my best
interest? And do you have any proof of this claim?

Yup. Try to file your ideas in paper form to any suitable conference
that works in this direction. Specifically, I would recommend the DCC
(Data Compression Conference), Snowbird, UT. Held every year in Spring,
because that fits perfectly into this group.

Probably if you don't believe the judgment of this group, you might find
the judgment of referees more suitable.

All I can state from *my* experience is that if you make claims, you
better present experimental results to back them up, otherwise your
paper is not going to be accepted.

If you make extraordinary claims, it is very likely the paper wouldn't
be accepted to begin with, unless you provide very, very, very good
results to back up your claims.

IW, if you don't want to provide evidence, the best you can do is just
be silent.

So long,
Thomas

jacko wrote:

>1. Carrier stream
>>
A carrier stream carries information via modulation from point to
point. The carrier having such property as to allow for transmission
through a media between said points. Baseband information is modulated
on to a carrier using a modulation method.
>
In the context of the K Ring Codec, the carrier is a sequentially
generated stream which has a lower than 50:50 entropy,

Excuse me, but if you want to be understood, please use proper language.
What is a 50:50 entropy? That term is not defined. Entropy requires a
model (hence, an alphabet of symbols), what is it? What are the
probabilities, what is the size of the alphabet, what are the symbols,
and which entropy do you mean?

allowing jaxon

Sorry, what does this word mean? My english dictionary doesn't carry it.

modulation

Which type of modulation? This word makes sense for analog signals, but
here we have two random sources with alphabets A and B. What is a
modulation in this sense?

of baseband/user information upon it without increasing the
number of bits in the sequence. As the sequence is algorithmically
generated, by a reversable algorithm, then the carrier can be rewound
to demodulate the baseband or user information.

If "modulation" is a reversible algorithmic operation, yes.

>2. Absorb
>>
The modulation process is absorbative for carrier entropy of a low
enough value (>2:1) state bias.

What does "absorbative" mean? I don't think this word is spelled
correctly, but besides that, if the "modulation" is "reversible",
nothing can be "absorbed", so what do you mean?

The modulation absorbs the baseband
information into the carrier stream. The said carrier stream does not
expand in size as it is algorithmically generated.

I don't understand the "as it is" part of this sentence. Why would it
expand in size if it would be *not* algorithmically generated? If your
"modulation" operates on a symbol-by-symbol basis (which I don't know
since you haven't stated this), why should anything expand (as you get
the same number of output symbols as input symbols). IW, this sentence
(as it stands) is not understandable.

And will just as
easily start from a post modulated state as though it had got there by
either modulation or by generation from the previous carrier state.
>3. State machine ¯_¯

That term is well-defined and a technical term in the field.

A machine which has various defined states. Usuually identified by
descreet integer variables of fixed precission. A clock causes the
state of the state machine to change state depending on the state and
rule set for the machine. A CPU is a state machine.

Why do you need a clock? In fact, if it only changes states due to a
clock, the state machine would be rather boring. I would rather state
that a state machine is represented by a graph of states where a
transition from one state to another (identified with the vertices of
the graph) is triggered by external events. (Not just a clock).


>4. Composite state machine ¯_¯!
A state machine built from multiple state machines.

, a state machine can always be composited from multiple state
machines, given a suitable definition of "composition", so what do you
mean? Also, the reverse is also true: If you pick two state machines,
and define pairs of events as the input to this group, you always get a
state machine again. Hence, what do you mean?


A dual core is a
composite state machine due to having 2 cores.

What is a core?

>5. Rising_Edge(clock) and falling (yeah, i'm ****ing dumb allright)
Google sychronous logic VHDL

That's a definition from electrical engineering. I wonder why it's
needed for state machines - are these two possible events you want to
react on?

The carrier performs the role of accepting a modulation code to embed
user information into an sequence. The reversal of said sequence along
with demodulation of the user information from the carrier, restores
the user information in reverse order.

Well, which says very little.

Now, please explain a little more what they mean and we're in discussion.

So long,
Thomas

NB.
>
Jaxon Modulation (JM)
assuming B is the carrier stream:
>
if(B==1) emit(A,1); //emit rather than absorb
if(B==0) if(collect(A)==1) { B=1;emit(A,0); }
>
That would be the JM method.
>
The properties of this modulation method do NT depend significantly
on the statistics or entropy of A, but only on the entropy of B. If
the entropy is greater than the critical figure supplied in my last
post then the modulation is a net emitter, while if it is less than
the supplied calculated figure, it is a net collector/absorber.

cheers.

jacko wrote:

>Excuse me, but if you want to be understood, please use proper language.
>What is a 50:50 entropy? That term is not defined. Entropy requires a
>model (hence, an alphabet of symbols), what is it? What are the
>probabilities, what is the size of the alphabet, what are the symbols,
>and which entropy do you mean?
>
Yes Sum -p log2(p)
so I would say 50:50 % implies 1/2 0 1/2 1 entropy =1.(as useual most
things like mark space ratio written in 100% total)

So you have a binary alphabet with two symbols of a memoryless source.
Why is this a good model of the "carrier"? rather, why would it make
sense to understand this as "random source"? For example, the sequence



can be easily generated "algorithmically" and is even a "typical"
sequence for an i.i.d. zero-order maximum entropy two-symbol random
source. Is that a useful carrier? If so, why not pick it always (and
simplify the design), if not so, why not? Why is this a useful
description of a "carrier"?

I think what is a bit bizarre here is that you state that your encoder
is in full control of generating the *carrier*, so it is not a random
source, so why is it necessary or useful to model it as such.
Specifically, given a method I would expect the outcome to depend
heavily on *which* "carrier" you pick, not only on its zero-order iid
random source property.

So now we've worked out that binary seems to be that alphabet of my
choice, an average understanding of entropy would imply that an
entropy of less than 1/3*(2*log2(3/2)+log2(3)) is what I would be
looking for.

>Which type of modulation? This word makes sense for analog signals, but
>here we have two random sources with alphabets A and B. What is a
>modulation in this sense?
Jaxon Modulation (JM)
assuming B is the carrier stream:
>
if(B==1) emit(A,1); //emit rather than absorb
if(B==0) if(collect(A)==1) { B=1;emit(A,0); }

What does "emit(A,1)" mean? Generate two output symbols, first A,then 1?
What does "collect(A)==1" mean? Why don't you need to emit the input
signal (I suppose "A") in case "B == 0 and collect(A) != 1"?
Why would you expect the output of this be useful?
What is the carrier, what is the "source"? (I suppose A is the source,
but you never state this.)

of baseband/user information upon it without increasing the
number of bits in the sequence. As the sequence is algorithmically
generated, by a reversable algorithm, then the carrier can be rewound
to demodulate the baseband or user information.
>If "modulation" is a reversible algorithmic operation, yes.
>
You will find the above JM method is reversable.

If you explain the above symbols, then well, I might indeed.

2. Absorb
The modulation process is absorbative for carrier entropy of a low
enough value (>2:1) state bias.
>What does "absorbative" mean? I don't think this word is spelled
>correctly, but besides that, if the "modulation" is "reversible",
>nothing can be "absorbed", so what do you mean?
>
And I suppose you keep a copy of your baseband and send that too
(somehow on some other method), along with your modulated carrier, cos
you think your carrier has not absorbed enough of the data to be
allowed to just get on with transmitting it?

I don't quite follow you - are you considering a multi-channel coding
setup? What is the "baseband" (I don't see a definition). The "modulated
carrier" is likely the output of the above pseudo-code (which seems
incomplete.). If I count correctly, the above should expand the source
by a factor of two. Why is this a good thing to do?


The modulation absorbs the baseband
information into the carrier stream. The said carrier stream does not
expand in size as it is algorithmically generated.
>I don't understand the "as it is" part of this sentence. Why would it
>expand in size if it would be *not* algorithmically generated? If your
>"modulation" operates on a symbol-by-symbol basis (which I don't know
>since you haven't stated this), why should anything expand (as you get
>the same number of output symbols as input symbols). IW, this sentence
>(as it stands) is not understandable.
>
It = the .carrier
>
If it were not algorithmically generated, it would be possible/likely
to be not reversable, and it would have to store some information
within the state machine for reconstruction (by algorithm). It has to
be algorithmically generatable to be reversable. Yes symbol by symbol
basis. Yes.

, so for the time being, may I assume that the "carrier" is a
pseudo-random generated source of which the same seed is used in the
sender and the receiver, so no side information is required to
re-generate it. That seems clear enough. What does not seem clear enough
is why it has to be pseudo-random, and what the benefit of this is.

>, a state machine can always be composited from multiple state
>machines, given a suitable definition of "composition", so what do you
>mean? Also, the reverse is also true: If you pick two state machines,
>and define pairs of events as the input to this group, you always get a
>state machine again. Hence, what do you mean?
>
A carrier can be made up of many state machines, each producing a
small amount of entropy reduction. The resultant composite carrier can
have a larger reduction.

Why would you believe that the above pseudo-code causes an entropy
reduction? at least a reduction that compensates for the factor of
two of the expansion generated by the algorithm?

A dual core is a
composite state machine due to having 2 cores.
>What is a core?
>
Google Intel Core 2 Duo

, I didn't know you talked about the CPU brand as a particular state
machine I do not see how *that's* related, though, but never mind.

So long,
Thomas

Damn, missed the party again. Jack and Richter at it like the old
days, but this time without cock-nosed ape bystanders -- Guenther
committed suicide and Phil's too busy gettin' fat.

I'll catch up later, I need a snooze. 'Can't get no ****ing sedatives
from the doc. All this time thinkin that adulthood means makin your
own decisions, yet an adult still needs permission from a geezer to
buy pills. Total bull****, man.

jacko schrieb:

So you have a binary alphabet with two symbols of a memoryless source.
Why is this a good model of the "carrier"? rather, why would it make
sense to understand this as "random source"? For example, the sequence
A never said it was a memoryless source, in fact it has to have some
memory in order to have a lower entropy than 1.
>Huh? If you compute the entropy like you did (zero-order entropy), then
>of course it can have a small entropy without a memory. Consider a dice-roll
>where you map 1->0 and all other events to one. The corresponding random
>source is of course memoryless, but has a small entropy.
>>
bad carrier example due to not being able to hold modulation of 1 to 0
as bias favours 1. and so which 1 state is the correct 1 state to
demodulate to 1. well a carrier has to hold modulation or it has not
been modulated in the strictest sense.

Why is this an answer to my question? Did you get my question?

You will note the source entropy of this "unideal" carrier excedds the
required entropy, and so is very unuseful as a carrier.
>Why is it "unideal"? What qualifies an "ideal" carrier?
one which holds modulation.

What does that mean? How can "modulation hold"?

>So given a source sequence, how to pick the proper carrier? And how to let
>the receiver know that you picked a specific carrier (you would need to
>inform the receiver of course on your choice, otherwise you cannot reverse
>the process). And assume that I have an algorithm to pick the proper carrier,
>is it clear that for every source a "suitable" carrier exist? that it can
>be picked from a small family? How about the size of the side-information
>required to let the receiver know about your choice? Is that included?
carrier does not depend on source.

If it doesn't, why would you expect that "modulation" helps?

>This said, I might be convinced that for every source a "carrier" exists
>that "modulates" this source to complete zero, hence something very
>compressible. However, this gains you nothing since then the "carrier" is so
>complicated (probably more complicated than the source) and you would need
>to transmit this "side information", so the net effect is no compression
>anymore.
file is collected and so zero size.
>IW, why is this a good idea? A quick argument I have would go as follows:
>If the "carrier" absorbs entropy, this entropy doesn't go to nowhere. It is
>exactly the amount of information required to identify the carrier successfully
>at the receiver.
>>
are you sure. are you sure it has to be added somewhere, and may not
be subtracted from somewhere?

Did you get the question? I did not mean "added" in the algebraic sense,
but rather, it (or the seed) has to be included in the transmission to
make it decodeable. However, as the carrier becomes more and more
complicated, more bits have to be spend to transmit the "seed".

if(B==1) emit(A,1); //emit rather than absorb
if(B==0) if(collect(A)==1) { B=1;emit(A,0); }
What does "emit(A,1)" mean? Generate two output symbols, first A,then 1?
What does "collect(A)==1" mean? Why don't you need to emit the input
signal (I suppose "A") in case "B == 0 and collect(A) != 1"?
Why would you expect the output of this be useful?
What is the carrier, what is the "source"? (I suppose A is the source,
but you never state this.)
A is the user data stream
emit(A,x) = "emit the binary symbol x to the beginning of straem A"
collect(A) = "collect binary symbol from the beginning of stream A"
>I don't understand - how do you emit a symbol at the beginning of a stream?
>Do you mean, your input is a FIF, not a stream? (A stream is something I would
>consider to be read and written only in one direction)
fifo if easier to understand.

So the input is not a stream, but a FIF

The carrier is B, The modulation is the B=1; statement using C
language syntax.
>Yes, that part I understood. I still don't understand the algorithm.
do you understand the modulation technique, otherwise what's the point
in describing a carrier to you.

Look, "understanding the modulation technique" and "understanding the
algorithm" mean exactly the same. I cannot understand one without the other.

>In your above algorithm, B seems to indicate a state of a state machine - I never
>see a statement that B is "collected" from the B-stream. Is that an omission?
>is B updated at the end of each algorithm step? If so, why does line 2 set B to one?
b is not collected but is evaluated once per cycle.

Where is that "evaluation" step in the algorithm above? I.e. when is B
updated? There is no statement that changes the value of B in the above
algorithm.

The above code does not necessarily cause an entropy reduction. The
above code allows modulation of any entropy stream onto a carrier
which has already had its entropy reduced by algorithmic design.
>, so why do that then? IW, how would you require the carrier to look like to
>get an output of lower entropy?
the carrier has by design (just one design) a low entropy already we
are not trying to use modulation to lower it, but to send information
on it.

, but then what's the point if the point is not to lower entropy? IW,
what does "absorb" then mean, and why do you want to do that?

IW, what's the purpose of this algorithm? Don't tell me "modulation",
that's just a different word. Just tell me "why would I want to run it".

sending the current seed of B is like sending B and all of A collected
upon it.
>Well - if B is generated by a Pseudo-random generator, I agree. But the amount
>of size reduction should be no larger than the size of the seed, I would believe.
why would that be? the collection count is based only on the carrier
entrpy.

No, the collection count is based on the number of "1"s in the B-stream.
That's not the entropy.

>, even different, why would I expect to find for a given source a good pseudo-random
>generator and a good seed that would help me? This seems rather hard.

>
windows is **** again.

How does that relate to anything I've written?

So long,
Thomas

Thomas Richter wrote:
jacko schrieb:
>
So you have a binary alphabet with two symbols of a memoryless source.
Why is this a good model of the "carrier"? rather, why would it make
sense to understand this as "random source"? For example, the sequence
A never said it was a memoryless source, in fact it has to have some
memory in order to have a lower entropy than 1.
>Huh? If you compute the entropy like you did (zero-order entropy), then
>of course it can have a small entropy without a memory. Consider a dice-roll
>where you map 1->0 and all other events to one. The corresponding random
>source is of course memoryless, but has a small entropy.
>>
bad carrier example due to not being able to hold modulation of 1 to 0
as bias favours 1. and so which 1 state is the correct 1 state to
demodulate to 1. well a carrier has to hold modulation or it has not
been modulated in the strictest sense.
>
Why is this an answer to my question? Did you get my question?
the entropy may be different but only the computed 0th order has value
at present for calculating the nett collection of A.
You will note the source entropy of this "unideal" carrier excedds the
required entropy, and so is very unuseful as a carrier.
>Why is it "unideal"? What qualifies an "ideal" carrier?
one which holds modulation.
>
What does that mean? How can "modulation hold"?
if you modulated a 1 to 0 (major to minor state) how would you know in
the dice example which major state to demodulate back to? it does
therefore not hold modulation.
>So given a source sequence, how to pick the proper carrier? And how to let
>the receiver know that you picked a specific carrier (you would need to
>inform the receiver of course on your choice, otherwise you cannot reverse
>the process). And assume that I have an algorithm to pick the proper carrier,
>is it clear that for every source a "suitable" carrier exist? that it can
>be picked from a small family? How about the size of the side-information
>required to let the receiver know about your choice? Is that included?
carrier does not depend on source.
>
If it doesn't, why would you expect that "modulation" helps?
if the file size of A is going toward zero, I say that helps. when it
becomes 0 it has helped a lot.
>This said, I might be convinced that for every source a "carrier" exists
>that "modulates" this source to complete zero, hence something very
>compressible. However, this gains you nothing since then the "carrier" is so
>complicated (probably more complicated than the source) and you would need
>to transmit this "side information", so the net effect is no compression
>anymore.
file is collected and so zero size.
>IW, why is this a good idea? A quick argument I have would go as follows:
>If the "carrier" absorbs entropy, this entropy doesn't go to nowhere. It is
>exactly the amount of information required to identify the carrier successfully
>at the receiver.
>>
are you sure. are you sure it has to be added somewhere, and may not
be subtracted from somewhere?
>
Did you get the question? I did not mean "added" in the algebraic sense,
but rather, it (or the seed) has to be included in the transmission to
make it decodeable. However, as the carrier becomes more and more
complicated, more bits have to be spend to transmit the "seed".
it does not have to be so. if it is a self lowering entropy stream. a
special carrier.
if(B==1) emit(A,1); //emit rather than absorb
if(B==0) if(collect(A)==1) { B=1;emit(A,0); }
What does "emit(A,1)" mean? Generate two output symbols, first A,then 1?
What does "collect(A)==1" mean? Why don't you need to emit the input
signal (I suppose "A") in case "B == 0 and collect(A) != 1"?
Why would you expect the output of this be useful?
What is the carrier, what is the "source"? (I suppose A is the source,
but you never state this.)
A is the user data stream
emit(A,x) = "emit the binary symbol x to the beginning of straem A"
collect(A) = "collect binary symbol from the beginning of stream A"
>I don't understand - how do you emit a symbol at the beginning of a stream?
>Do you mean, your input is a FIF, not a stream? (A stream is something I would
>consider to be read and written only in one direction)
fifo if easier to understand.
>
So the input is not a stream, but a FIF
if it helps to understand then yes. a fifo with a stream preloaded
into it. the user content.
The carrier is B, The modulation is the B=1; statement using C
language syntax.
>Yes, that part I understood. I still don't understand the algorithm.
do you understand the modulation technique, otherwise what's the point
in describing a carrier to you.
>
Look, "understanding the modulation technique" and "understanding the
algorithm" mean exactly the same. I cannot understand one without the other.
no they don't understanding the modulation onto a special carrier and
the special carrier design are different.
>In your above algorithm, B seems to indicate a state of a state machine - I never
>see a statement that B is "collected" from the B-stream. Is that an omission?
>is B updated at the end of each algorithm step? If so, why does line 2 set B to one?
b is not collected but is evaluated once per cycle.
>
Where is that "evaluation" step in the algorithm above? I.e. when is B
updated? There is no statement that changes the value of B in the above
algorithm.
b=1 or did you not read it. the evaluation is per carrier cycle.
The above code does not necessarily cause an entropy reduction. The
above code allows modulation of any entropy stream onto a carrier
which has already had its entropy reduced by algorithmic design.
>, so why do that then? IW, how would you require the carrier to look like to
>get an output of lower entropy?
the carrier has by design (just one design) a low entropy already we
are not trying to use modulation to lower it, but to send information
on it.
>
, but then what's the point if the point is not to lower entropy? IW,
what does "absorb" then mean, and why do you want to do that?
to get any stream collected/absorbed onto a carrier of much lower
complexity.
IW, what's the purpose of this algorithm? Don't tell me "modulation",
that's just a different word. Just tell me "why would I want to run it".
if you had a special carrier you would run it to collect fifo A onto
it to compress data.
sending the current seed of B is like sending B and all of A collected
upon it.
>Well - if B is generated by a Pseudo-random generator, I agree. But the amount
>of size reduction should be no larger than the size of the seed, I would believe.
why would that be? the collection count is based only on the carrier
entrpy.
>
No, the collection count is based on the number of "1"s in the B-stream.
That's not the entropy.
is based on != is.
>, even different, why would I expect to find for a given source a good pseudo-random
>generator and a good seed that would help me? This seems rather hard.
>
>
windows is **** again.
>
How does that relate to anything I've written?
it doesn't it makes my writing shorter via pocket pc not desktop which
has said 8 minuites left for the last 2 hrs.
>
So long,
Thomas

, am I following up right: the user baseband information (the input
stream) when modulated makes it into a carrier stream, must have a 2:1
bias in order to allow compression later. But if the input stream is
random with a 50:50 entropy then modulating it would create 50% more
0s than 1s, so it would now have a 3:2 bias. Not enough? Do we re-
modulate which will now make the file twice as longer so it finally
becomes a stream with a 2:1 bias? How do you get the file to be
shorter than the original when it's twice as larger now?

I knew what a state machine was the first time, I just thought you
meant something else. What is the role of this clock in relations to
the machine states? And what the hell is a FIF?

Feel free to copy/paste parts of your previous posts if necessary. Am
still piss-ass drunk from last night (nothin' helps me sleep better
than alcohol ATM) so cant think straight.

This Valerian plant you suggested list some stats, is it effective?
does it cause physical dependancy? it's only available in europe and
i'm in north america, but I can get a couple friends from europe to
hook me up if possible, if all else fails, you wouldnt mind hookin me
up, eh?

Industrial wrote:
, am I following up right: the user baseband information (the input
stream) when modulated makes it into a carrier stream, must have a 2:1
bias in order to allow compression later. But if the input stream is
random with a 50:50 entropy then modulating it would create 50% more
0s than 1s, so it would now have a 3:2 bias. Not enough? Do we re-
modulate which will now make the file twice as longer so it finally
becomes a stream with a 2:1 bias? How do you get the file to be
shorter than the original when it's twice as larger now?
the input stream makes it onto a carrier which has 2:1 bias pre
modulation. it is then moved on to its next state algorithmically to
be the next carrier state. which can itself be modulated ad infinitum.
why do you have the need to want to draw the carrier out into a stream
to be compressed later, when its compact representation is just so
much smaller. the carrier is always generated from its own past state
of less than 100 bits.
I knew what a state machine was the first time, I just thought you
meant something else. What is the role of this clock in relations to
the machine states? And what the hell is a FIF?
clock to synchronize, first in first out stack.
Feel free to copy/paste parts of your previous posts if necessary. Am
still piss-ass drunk from last night (nothin' helps me sleep better
than alcohol ATM) so cant think straight.
>
This Valerian plant you suggested list some stats, is it effective?
does it cause physical dependancy? it's only available in europe and
i'm in north america, but I can get a couple friends from europe to
hook me up if possible, if all else fails, you wouldnt mind hookin me
up, eh?
valium made from it.