As Peter remarked, in what sense "Recursive data compression is supposed to be an impossibility"? Your question is missing a lot of information, beginning with your "system", that is if you want some answers from people...

Sorry, I didn't realize telepathic ability was a requirement for reading a paper. Here is the secret link to magically getting to my description Preprint A Method for Recursive Data Compression

You have to repeat the mantra Oh-wa-tin-a-siam between 9-27 times aloud for it to show its true structure though.

I can not summarize a highly complex system in a few words or a simple few formula's in a text box....sorry about that. Please read the paper or don't.

Maybe you could try the following challenge with your method!

http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/the-enduring-challenge-of-compressing-ra/240049914#

http://marknelson.us/2012/10/09/the-random-compression-challenge-turns-ten/

Thanks Bruno,

Once the code has been completed, I will see if it will work on this, even if just for kicks. There is another competition I saw for 50,000 Euro's too, but my program is looking like it will be a bit too large. I've submitted my patent application to IBM's R&D department, (who's engineers have cited my Modular Computer Work in the past), so maybe they will bite, and then I can take the time to figure out how to mathematically optimize the code for both speed and size.

Good luck!

Thanks for the feedback Peter. Perhaps I will delete the quotes at the end and include the compression statistics when we complete and run the actual program....if it doesn't work, perhaps I will explore a film career as you suggested. I have always wanted to direct a film about Nikola Tesla's love story with his favourite pigeon.

Hi Peter,

I do NOT presently agree with the quotes. That is the point of this paper (and upcoming software program). I am attempting to expand or change the commonly viewed idea that random data can not be recursively compressed again and again.

The quotes were placed in the paper to show that the commonly held view seems to be that, what I am attempting to do is impossible. I don't view "quoting" public comments to try and grasp a concept as criminal. Perhaps my paper and I will someday be quoted as a poor/failed attempt at recursive compression and I can move on to making my film about the most beautiful pigeon in NYC, but until then, I have yet to see a flaw in my logic.

You obviously did not read or comprehend our strategy. It has more to do with permutations, their complements and probability theory than a simple math formula from grade school. It seems like you might simply be trolling? It is the concept that is important, not whether or not I explained it with formulas or english. Having the concepts be understood is all that matters. In your specific case I either did not explain it well enough or you did not grasp it.

Asking the scientific community seems to have been a poor feedback strategy for this. It seems a lot of people take this compression thing VERY seriously. I will post results when we finish coding and running the program....and no I will not be utilizing the code that you have provided.

Thx!