Back to Blog
Finnegans wake gutenberg5/23/2023 ![]() ![]() Note that we don’t actually need to implement quaternion multiplication in general, though that would be sufficient. How would you best implement quaternion multiplication? Of course the answer depends on your environment and what you mean by “best.” Could that be exploited for some slight efficiency? But the input to the question about Finnegans Wake only involves three of these elements. We’re carrying out multiplications in the group Q of unit quaternions, a group with eight elements: ☑, ± i, ± j, ± k. Is there any sort of useful summary of the data short of carrying out the whole multiplication? In other words, could you scan the list while doing something other than quaternion multiplication, something faster to compute? Something analogous to sufficient statistics. So it would not be enough to have a count of how many times each letter appears. the order in which you multiply things matters. ![]() Quaternion multiplication is not commutative, i.e. You could initialize an accumulator to 1 and then march through the list, updating the accumulator by multiplying it by the next element. Suppose you did extract all the i‘s, j‘s, and k‘s from James Joyce’s novel Finnegans Wake. Result of extracting the i’s, j’s, and k’s in order from Finnegans Wake and interpreting as a quaternion product ![]() ![]() It posts bizarre queries that Wolfram Alpha can’t answer. I stumbled on a Twitter account yesterday called Wolfram|Alpha Can’t. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |