> On Oct 18, 2:36 pm, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote: > > hardwidg said: > > > > > On Oct 18, 10:33 am, Water Cooler v2 <wtr_...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > >> I thought it would be too cumbersome as in the actual problem I have > > >> at hand, the number of "fruits" are about 255 and the number of boxes, > > >> about 60. > > > > > I don't think any algorithm can ever finish, since it sounds like you > > > want to list 255^60 entries, which is greater than 10^144. > > > > > The universe has something like 10^80 atoms and is less than 10^18 > > > seconds old. > > > > > Even if you had every atom working for the life of the universe, you'd > > > still need them to create 10^46 entries each second! Even if they > > > could make one entry per Planck time, you'll still only be able to > > > create about 1/1000 of the entries! > > > > Just use a quantum computer to tap into the computational potential of > > infinitely many universes. Total runtime: about a sixteenth of a second > > (i.e. as long as it takes you to realise that it's finished). > > The only problem is that the output is spread across 10^144 universes. > Compiling the list in one universe will require all the time that you > saved by spreading out the work. > > Of course, if you had connections from each quantum universe to ours, > then they could write their output all at the same time, and it would > work.
It would? Where in this universe would they put the output? We don't have enough atoms to write each entry on an existing atom. And if their output involves adding new atoms to our universe, it'll make things rather crowded... and have very serious effects on space-time. -- Robert Israel israel@math.MyUniversitysInitials.ca Department of Mathematics http://www.math.ubc.ca/~israel University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada