Newsgroups: comp.compression Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!wilf From: wilf@sce.carleton.ca (Wilf Leblanc) Subject: Re: IP gnitaluclaC rof margorP (Was Re: Program for Calculating PI) Message-ID: Sender: news@ccs.carleton.ca (news) Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada References: <28916@dime.cs.umass.edu> <24380001@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com> Date: 10 Apr 91 02:20:25 GMT otto@tukki.jyu.fi (Otto J. Makela) writes: >In article jpc@fct.unl.pt (Jose Pina Coelho) writes: > Won't work, PI is uncompressible, one billion digits won't fit in a > diskette. On the other hand, if you run the program on the cray you'll > have PI in the cray in a lot less time (after all, diskettes are slow). >I wouldn't be so sure about it. Pi is globally high-entropy but locally >displays repeated sequences etc., which should make it compressable. Of >course it doesn't compress very much, but it does compress some. >-- This post started out as a joke, and most in net.land may think it is still a joke. Pi, e, 1.00, and any number we can generate with a finite length program is (very) compressible, and contains very little information. Using Pi as the basis for a compression algorithm is also rather foolish (IMHO), since why should Pi have any better properties than any other random (or pseudo-random) sequence ?? Pi is Pi is Pi, and has slightly more information than 1, but slightly less than 2.2, and not just because Pi can be written with 2 chars, and 2.2 requires 3 (-; So the bottom line is that I'll shutup about Pi now, and hope that this thread will end soon. -- Wilf LeBlanc, Carleton University, Systems & Comp. Eng. Ottawa, Canada, K1S 5B6 Internet: wilf@sce.carleton.ca UUCP: ...!uunet!mitel!cunews!sce!wilf Oh, cruel fate! Why do you mock me so! (H. Simpson)