[offtopic] New Encryption I Dreamed Up

Hello, Today I was thinking and I thought of a new type of encryption, now at the moment, at least I think, encryption works on turning the data into lots of different numbers, but here is my idea:

Instead of lots of numbers how about encoding all the data in the file into one Binary 0, I think this would be damn near impossible to unecrypt without the passcode.

I may be dreaming up something that has already been invented or is very very improbable, but if this were to be possible I would be very very happy.

p.s. Welcome into my head.

#82402

umm it already is in binary....

Also i think our current level incription would be 10x stronger then that, rember the more possibilitys we have for each item the harder it is.

#82408

I don't understand. Are you saying to get the binary of the textand make all the 1's to be 0's? So then you would just have a base 1 number. How would that work?

#82410

I think he's trying to be funny...

"Encrypting" all data into one Binary 0 would require two things - 1) the ultimate compression algorithm, to allow all the data to be shrunk into a single bit (which would then mean that the data could only be one of two things - 0 or 1, or depending on your point of view, false or true). 2) A corresponding decompression algorithm.

Technically speaking, such an algorithm does exist, but the big problem with it is decrypting...

Even with the correct password, it's impossible to decrypt your original data

If people wanna talk about "secure" systems, ask me about quantum computers' memory...

#82435

How does Quantum computers memory work ?

#82439

jeezuz, geek talk's gonna begin, I'd better scram...

#82440

Originally posted by Seph@Nov 24 2003, 11:30 PM

How does Quantum computers memory work ?

Ok...

This is very simplified, by the way..

Quantum computers use qubits to store data.

Qubits are very special.

A qubit, like a "classic" bit, is capable of storing 0 or 1. Where a qubit stands out is that a qubit can also store 0 and 1 at the same time. For example, if you have a 3 bit "classic" system, you can store any individual number from 0-7. With a 3-qubit quantum computer, however, you can store, in those 3 qubits, every number from 0-7 inclusive at the same time.

To whit, in a 250 qubit system, you can store the "value" of every single atom in the known universe.

Oh, and for those of you who're wondering, a single qubit can be (and typically is) made of a single atom. So, with 250 atoms, we can store the "value" of every single atom in the known universe.

The problem, however, arises when we wish to read from our memory. If we try to read the memory, the system will choose one of the values at random to give as the output (on a roughly normal distribution).

I could go into much more depth about the whys and wherefores, but I think I'd scare people >.<

#82443

Thank you, i loove it when you talk dirty to me

#82445

Originally posted by Seph@Nov 24 2003, 11:41 PM

Thank you, i loove it when you talk dirty to me

Wrong thread, on the wrong forum, Seph... :6

#82446

I've actually read some books that has lots of quantum stuff, it's kinda fascinating. Too bad it's not really usable yet.

#82450

Originally posted by LoofyGun@Nov 24 2003, 11:52 PM

I've actually read some books that has lots of quantum stuff, it's kinda fascinating. Too bad it's not really usable yet.

There is that, yeah...

To be honest, I doubt that quantum computing will become "mainstream" anytime in our lives... Whilst it provides a massive potential, there are some things that will stop it - governments, for example... Current cryptographic technologies can be broken in a fraction of a second on a quantum computer with a handful of qubits (<100)... Although, of course, quantum-computer-based encryption would likely be the next step...

Not only that, but the maths that they're required for, I believe, won't be used that extensively in a "home" environment for a while yet...

#82456

I honestly think that the true reason why this technology couldnt be implemented anytime soon is because we cannot as yet control the nature of a single photon or an atom.

Or can we then control nature at the level of single photons and atoms?

Edit: spelling

#82460

Any idea how many fps I'll get in Quake 3 on that quantum machine thingy?

Sorry I'm a ****.

#82461

@Seph: The big problem, at the moment, is that qubits are difficult to produce. The biggest quantum computer at the moment consists of ~1000 qubits, but is equivalent to a "true" 100-200 qubit machine, because the qubits in it are imperfect. Basically, there are lots and lots of fun ways to represent qubits, from using single atoms to using light arrays, and a whole gamut of other things...

@Sid: On a 32 qubit machine, you'd get 0-12884901885000000000 FPS, all at the same time. Until you plug your monitor in, at which point, the FPS would be any one in that range at any given moment... So, effectively, for any given CPU cycle, the system may render somewhere between 0 and 4294967295 frames (in other words, your framerate would fluctuate massively from cycle to cycle, but would likely average out over a second to the mean of the distribution)... >.<

#82472

Originally posted by Stevie BM@Nov 24 2003, 06:13 PM

@Sid:  On a 32 qubit machine, you'd get 0-4294967295 FPS, all at the same time.  Until you plug your monitor in, at which point, the FPS would be any one in that range at any given moment...  So, effectively, for any given CPU cycle, the system may render somewhere between 0 and 2 frames (in other words, your framerate would fluctuate massively from cycle to cycle, but would likely average out over a second to the mean of the distribution)...  >.<

Well that sucks. oh well my AthlonXP 2500+ should do for now...<_<

#82474

Stevie, but then again, given the fact of how information is stored in the registers (more specifically on whta that info is stored ) photons, atoms, call em whatever you want, more than 40qubits would end up in information evolution (photohs enrgetic level stepping out of its "register" and thus affecting levels on neighboring data)...ergo... data loss or corruptness.. i think that should be considered even before getting 100 - 200 qubit computers!

#82478

Originally posted by Seph@Nov 24 2003, 05:23 PM

photons, atoms, call em whatever you want,

Atoms are made of photons.

Edit: Clarify: Atoms are made of Sub-atomic particles (protons, nuetrons, electrons), subatomic particles are made of photons.

#82479

Originally posted by Seph@Nov 25 2003, 12:23 AM

Stevie, but then again, given the fact of how information is stored in the registers (more specifically on whta that info is stored ) photons, atoms, call em whatever you want,  more than 40qubits would end up in information evolution (photohs enrgetic level stepping out of its "register" and thus affecting levels on neighboring data)...ergo... data loss or corruptness.. i think that should be considered even before getting 100 - 200 qubit computers!

Funny you should say that, the very nature of qubits is such that this corruption cannot affect the data - the qubits, remember, are typically in all three states (0, 1, 0+1) at any one time. Ergo, the data is not "corruptable" by normal forces. The only way to "corrupt" the data (and, typically, get the final result of your calculation) is by "doping" the qubits until you have (very close to) a probability of 1 that whichever answer you get, it will be right. For example, in "searching" algorithms, an "accurate" result can be obtained in just over sqrt(n)* iterations, as opposed to n/2 iterations on "classic" architectures...

*sqrt() is used to represent the sqaure root.

What I described above is "Grover's Algorithm", by the way. If anyone wants more info, I can provide some links

#82483

Originally posted by wizard@Nov 25 2003, 12:25 AM

Atoms are made of photons.

Edit: Clarify: Atoms are made of Sub-atomic particles (protons, nuetrons, electrons), subatomic particles are made of photons.

And what are photons made of?

#82484

Hey, I took one year of physics and it was only the last week that we talked about this. I have yet got enough intrest to read up this on my own. Probably until now.

Wait, quarks? no that's light.

#82485

Originally posted by wizard@Nov 25 2003, 12:25 AM

subatomic particles are made of photons.

oooh its painful listening

of more interest to you guys at the moment is the light computer...

the speed of a processor is a measure of how fast a signal can get from end to end, if you can use light to carry that signal rather than electrons and holes you get a much faster chip.

An Israeli firm managed it just recently, a pda sized processor that is 1000 times more powerful than your desktop processor, a supercomputer in the palm of your hand.

now that will give you nice framerates (and in the next 10 years)

-fiss

#82494

Fair enough Stevie, but then, you would need to use some kind of method to actually stabilise a a quantum bit right? or elase youll have them jumping from one state to the other just as in Sids computer while playing quake 3.

THis could probably be achieved with simple error correction techniques (ie redundancy check) but then again, you have to have to first send all the information, or store the information as a duplicate and then match the bit states, but i dunno... heheh, just shooting in the dark here

#82497

The horror!!! I can just imagine....right when I'm about to rail some guy in his ass my fps drops to 2....*@#%@^@$^@$^@#6 :rant:

#82505

Originally posted by Seph@Nov 25 2003, 12:42 AM

Fair enough Stevie, but then, you would need to use some kind of method to actually stabilise a a quantum bit right? or elase youll have them jumping from one state to the other just as in Sids computer while playing quake 3.

THis could probably be achieved with simple error correction techniques (ie redundancy check) but then again, you have to have to first send all the information, or store the information as a duplicate and then match the bit states, but i dunno... heheh, just shooting in the dark here

I think you're missing the point - the entire reason that quantum computers can work is because of these sorts of effects.

As for the whole "2FPS", I didn't say that...

I said 0-2 frames per CPU cycle, and your FPS would likely average out at somewhere in the vast range of numbers I mentioned earlier...

#82583

Oh for crying out loud! This is embarrasing to read. Listen closely.

Atoms are made of protons and neutrons with electrons spinning around the outside.

A photon is a light 'particle' (light is both a wave and a particle). ie, one quanta (arbitrary unit) of energy.

Quarks are what make up protons and neutrons. The have different flavours. Up, down and a couple of other. Depending on the mixture of flavours, they combine to make eith a proton (positive charge) or a neutron (no charge). The electrons cancel out the positiveness of the protons.

OK, end of todays physics lesson. If you want more, we did several chapters on quantum at school :smartass: .

#82610