How fucking high were they when they came up with this shit?
Playing through this now. I lost some respect after reaching that point. I would have preferred the writers come up with another way to solve the 36-byte problem.
For instance, suppose Itaru uses LHC server storage to store a fuckhuge decompression dictionary. Anything slightly more plausible would be OK.
Still a fun game though.
What doesn't make sense about a black hole being able to compress data?
>>150760499
Data is an abstract concept. It's information. There are many ways to store data (magnetically, on paper, in one's mind). Those storage media let the data exist on the physical level. That's why we can shred an HDD and the information inside is lost.
Information compression is different from physical compression. Obviously, black holes don't have 7zip installed in them, so by talking about black holes, the plan is to "compress" on the physical level.
So why the fuck is the input/output measured in bytes, which is on the information level?? That's the problem. An ambiguity from the term "compression" that has two definitions.
>>150761082
Not to mention that there's no way human memories are so low in entropy that they can be compressed with a ratio of 9,896,000,000,000%.
>>150761082
Also the fact that one of the BASIC ELEMENTS of a black hole is that once matter passes the Event Horizon, all physics information ascribed to it (temperature, velocity, magnetic charge, etc) is near-permanently destroyed. There's no medium by which information can be stored in a Black Hole.
>>150761190
I don't do well with infodumps in literature usually, so perhaps I misunderstood, but I thought the spiel about Kerr black holes and lifters was to explain how the event horizons are able to be made escapable somehow.
>>150761190
>near-permanently destroyed
False. The only reason why we say information is "lost" inside a black hole is because there is no way (currently) for us to observe the information inside.
>>150761170
There is no theoretical lower bound on data compression.
>>150764038
You sound more well-read about that than I am, so I'll back off and leave it at "implausible" rather than "impossible".
say an ascii code "A" is 1 byte
and some data has literally 3.24trillions of "A"s in a row
then data size is 3.24TB
but you can write it like 324e10*A
with 8 ascii codes that has enough information to recover original data
there
3.24TB went to 8 bytes
>>150761082
I assumed the limit on the data that can be sent through a black hole, since the black hole isn't a computer, is due to physical constraints on the actual signal itself, which gravitational compression would affect.
That's why its called "fiction"
If it made sense it would be real