@lilchoconut

i'm pretty sure your calculation is wrong. idk how you went from 256^262144 to

(256^16384)^16

how you got there is impossible amd makes no sense. since there is no explaination

as for my answer i plugged into the graph function as

Y = 4294967296^X

i then checked the value of Y at X =9
It still comes out to 4.973232364E86 which is the closet you will get calculation wise by calculator

for those of you who are lost i will explain how i got to that plus the basis of this thread in my own words. i have to admit i was confused at what was going on when i first read this thread. in any case

2 hex = 1 bit
8 bits = 1 byte
256KB = 262144 bytes as was stated earlier.

a hex = a combination of symbols that have a base of 16.

16 *2 = 32
32 * 8 = 256 which is the amount of combos for one byte

which is where the equation 256^262144 comes into play

that number is to big. so to simplify it i took the 9th root of the power. which makes it out to 4.
256 ^4 = 4294967296
4294967296^9 is the same as 256 ^262144
this is seen if u do 4^9 which equals 262144

you can test this with a simple equation like 4^4

4^4 = 256
if u take the square of the power it becomes
(4^2)^2 in otherwords 16^2

so just to clarify
(256^4)^9 is the best way IMO to get the calculator to give a real answer.

HUBBY of DUBBY

i fixed my last post now.. still checking with ln...

but i got:
256^262144
=(256^16384)^16

from law of exponents (?):
x^6
= (x^2)^3

since 16384*16 = 262144

---edit1: btw too much math has made me confused @__@ faints
--edit2: i think its right now TT___TT goes back to sleep
-edit3: okay now its absolutely completely fixed and i don't want to edit it anymore

[img]http://img.userbars.pl/69/13603.gif[/img]

Quote from lilchoconut

i fixed my last post now.. still checking with ln...

but i got:
256^262144
=(256^16384)^16

from law of exponents (?):
x^6
= (x^2)^3

since 16384*16 = 262144

---edit: btw too much math has made me confused @__@ faints

hmmm. yeah mine is off in some other calculations. if that is so....one sec
Calculates
i think i've made a blunder.
EDIT - works for perfect squares

HUBBY of DUBBY

The problem is that Varna is using incorrect notation it should be 256^(4^9)=(256^16384)^16=256^262144, instead of (256^4)^9, which is equal to 256^36.

ya i noticed that. you didn't have to point out 😢 😢 😢 😢

EDIT. wait a sec. i did type 4^9 = 262144
i typed the wrong way also. but the theory looks good lol

HUBBY of DUBBY

Quote from Varna

2 hex = 1 bit
8 bits = 1 byte
256KB = 262144 bytes as was stated earlier.

Actually, 2 hex is 1 byte
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_numeral_system#Hexadecimal
0001 = 1
1010 = A

00011010 = 1A
(8 Bits) = (2 Hexes)

2 hex = 8 bits. typo, my bad. the calculation still comes out right though. u didn't have to be an asshole. argghhh shakes fist 😀

EDIT- i quit. too frustrated. been a few years since i took a math class. at least i tried 🙁

on a side note. assuming i still have some credibility lol a calculator will not go past a number that exceeds E99 for scientific notation(which this problem does). good luck checking that answer

HUBBY of DUBBY

Quote from Varna

u didn't have to be an asshole. argghhh shakes fist

Sorry, didn't mean to aggravate you. I just like to comment with facts. I don't only do it on the net, just yesterday I had to tell my class what "Beer Labor" is. And they actually, didn't know. 🤣

P.S.
Beer Labor - Work that is paid by bringing beer wile they work
ex: "Hey, I'm fixing my house. Wana help? I'll bring beer."
🤣 I'm such a hick

oh lmao. i was just thinking about what i said and came back to see if u responded haha. it was a joke. i wasn't mad at you or anything. i tend to say jerkish things. but seriously i'm pretty nice.

i didn't catch the mistake sigh. not perfect 🙁 . is a bit depressing though.

HUBBY of DUBBY

Figured so, but had to make sure. Almost all posts here are light haerted anyways

ye lol. i say stuff like that a lot in RL. it's hard to tell the tone though online. 😀 .

in any case how will you finding the exact number help anything?

HUBBY of DUBBY

I think lilchoconut's logarithmic approach was the best attempt so far. And the result she got seems highly plausible. Although I wonder what kind of calculator or software did she use?

I could probably modify a little program I already did to bypass the overflow limit in C++. Well when I made it I only designed it to work for "+ - / *"... So no "^"... But Seriously I don't feel like it right now. And you should be satisfied by the fact that you aren't even able to calculate the number of tries you're going to need let alone be able to do it.

And if you really just want to replace missing parts of a file by matching the hash that's useless... forget it.
The hash is made to check if errors have been introduced in the file. There are actually thousands of possible bits combinations that could match a particular hash code.
The thing is, we rely on the fact that it is highly unlikely that a random error could still match the hash. And that, unless someone knows the hash, he shouldn't be able to do so on purpose either. (Because it would take too long etc...)
So yeah, if you had the processing power you potentially could force a hash... But that would be of absolutely no use in the case of missing parts of a file. Because it would still be highly unlikely that you got the correct bit sequence that was missing.
On the other hand, if it's to hack into a system or something... you don't need the exact same bit sequence, you would just need any random bit sequence that could pass the hash check.

Quote from Varna

in any case how will you finding the exact number help anything?

I just wanted to see if creating a brute force hash matcher was even possible.But I now see that even with todays computing power it still to much.

oh i used the scientific calculator thing that comes with windows lol ^^;

the same one zinnkid used and showed a piccy of

[img]http://img.userbars.pl/69/13603.gif[/img]

Quote from Stealth

I think lilchoconut's logarithmic approach was the best attempt so far. And the result she got seems highly plausible. Although I wonder what kind of calculator or software did she use?

I could probably modify a little program I already did to bypass the overflow limit in C++. Well when I made it I only designed it to work for "+ - / *"... So no "^"... But Seriously I don't feel like it right now. And you should be satisfied by the fact that you aren't even able to calculate the number of tries you're going to need let alone be able to do it.

And if you really just want to replace missing parts of a file by matching the hash that's useless... forget it.
The hash is made to check if errors have been introduced in the file. There are actually thousands of possible bits combinations that could match a particular hash code.
The thing is, we rely on the fact that it is highly unlikely that a random error could still match the hash. And that, unless someone knows the hash, he shouldn't be able to do so on purpose either. (Because it would take too long etc...)
So yeah, if you had the processing power you potentially could force a hash... But that would be of absolutely no use in the case of missing parts of a file. Because it would still be highly unlikely that you got the correct bit sequence that was missing.
On the other hand, if it's to hack into a system or something... you don't need the exact same bit sequence, you would just need any random bit sequence that could pass the hash check.

Well, the next thing I wanted to find out is how many files that is exatly 256KB in size can have the same hash.