News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by pveierland on Wednesday September 29, 2021 @04:57PM (#28699851)
My shot at the calculation for fun :-)

Stick encoding with graphite resolution (0.335 * 10^-9 meter) [1]: "Uti" (31 bits -> 3 UTF8 characters)

Stick encoding with Planck resolution (1.616255 * 10^-35 meter) [2]: "Utility ought " (115 bits -> 14 UTF8 characters)

Complete first sentence: "Utility ought to be the principal intention of every publication." [3]

It appears that this storage scheme may not be suited towards the safekeeping of literature.

[1] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=floor%28floor%28log_2%...

[2] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=floor%28floor%28log_2%...

[3] https://digital.nls.uk/encyclopaedia-britannica/archive/1441...

Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by Nition on Wednesday September 29, 2021 @06:22PM (#28700755)
"Simply" scale up the stick to your desired minimum level of precision!
Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by omega3 on Thursday September 30, 2021 @07:09AM (#28705029)
Stick scaling left as an exercise for the reader.
Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by snek_case on Wednesday September 29, 2021 @11:22PM (#28702846)
You might have to wait for the universe to expand a bit more.
Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by Buraksr on Thursday September 30, 2021 @02:54AM (#28703854)
Fortunately, waiting is easy :)
Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by dotancohen on Thursday September 30, 2021 @07:23AM (#28705113)
I would look more into the limitations of the read tech (how accurately can we measure the stick length and the mark location) rather than inherent limitations of the medium. Very few technologies reach the actual theoretical limitations of the materials they are made of.
Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by adrian_b on Thursday September 30, 2021 @08:53AM (#28705724)
Straightforward length measurement (by interferometry) has a resolution limited by the wavelength of light that can be generated with lasers, so up to the near ultraviolet, at a few hundred nanometers.

Resolution smaller than a wavelength can be achieved with vernier techniques (like in a caliper), but those require a pair of light sources with precise frequency/phase relationships between themselves, which are difficult to make at such high frequencies, so it is hard to improve much the resolution.

I have not looked to see if there have been any progresses in recent years, but I would guess that a very approximate limit for the resolution of length measurement would be around 100 nm. So measuring the length of an 1 meter stick might provide up to log_2(10^7) bits, so about 23 ... 24 bits.

Of course, any temperature fluctuation would change the length of the stick by much more than the resolution.

However that can be avoided by encoding the information not in the absolute length, but in the ratio between the lengths of 2 segments marked on the stick.

No matter what, it is possible to write much more bit symbols on any stick than it is possible to encode in the measurements of one or a few lengths marked on the stick.

That is due to the fact that halving the size of a bit symbol doubles the quantity of information written on the stick, while halving the length corresponding to the measurement resolution provides just 1 single bit of extra stored information.

Re:How to fit any dataset with a single parameter by ur-whale on Thursday September 30, 2021 @05:49AM (#28704617)
> (115 bits -> 14 UTF8 characters)

Not exactly. If the 115bits are the hash/retrieval key of the actual content, then that can be a lot of information. Just have to have a big enough DB.