Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: bartekltg Newsgroups: comp.programming Subject: Re: Researches in quantum computing seem to progress only extremely slowly Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 03:30:22 +0200 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Lines: 36 Message-ID: References: <20150901111251.317@kylheku.com> <20150902054403.661@kylheku.com> <34teuahtcltdi1mrq4gj95bu8gacjv112i@4ax.com> <0a1fua58g3o3sbe715rv0ugvvkkdd06lvr@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 8yDXz2POMePMu60eIS0/Vw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: csiph.com comp.programming:5773 On 03.09.2015 03:17, Mok-Kong Shen wrote: > Am 03.09.2015 um 03:14 schrieb bartekltg: >> On 03.09.2015 03:03, Mok-Kong Shen wrote: >> >>> >>> What do you mean? If you consider that the input bits have an >>> entropy value of t with t < 1.0, then the output bits will >>> have entropy value of 128*t/n and the same paradoxical >>> effect would follow. >> >> No. This is wrong. I explained it a couple of times, >> but you need to _read_ it. Carefully and slowly. >> This isn't a hard part of mathematics, but it can >> be confusing at first try. First try to understand >> the definition of entropy. Read wiki or book, then >> look at my post with "4 bit toy AES". > > I do think that I know what entropy is. No, sadly you have no idea:( Not if you still claim "128/n". I don't talk about intuition, but a real definition. The half-true intimation is that what has mislead you. > Anyway, also > Wessel ágreed on my calculation of 128/n. (Would you > like to refute him?) WTF? Mathematics is not a democracy, there is no voting. I give you a simple proof. It even ton't deserve to be called a proof. "Substitute to the definition", this is all. bartekltg