mirror of
https://github.com/allaunthefox/SilverSight.git
synced 2026-07-31 01:25:21 +00:00
f5a1ac5f4b
Three O(1) reductions found in the existing codebase: 1. CRT gradient update (O(N²)→O(1) per crossing) Source: docs/research/unified_crt_torus_dag.md Energy update = one add, no recompute. Additivity of CRT residues. 2. CRT lift closed form (O(search)→O(1) formula) Source: archive/.../SidonWrapping.lean x = r₁ + L₁·((r₂−r₁)·L₁⁻¹ mod L₂). No search, one formula. 3. Adleman DNA computing (O(2ⁿ)→O(1) wet-lab steps) Source: archive/.../FOUNDATIONAL_GUIDANCE.md Lipton 1995: 2ⁿ assignments in parallel, O(1) lab operations. All three share: O(n) search → O(1) formula/physics → answer. Can they combine into a single O(1) transform? - They can be CHAINED (search→reconstruct→verify pipeline) - They cannot be MERGED (bottleneck is O(n) info extraction) - Conservation law: answer has O(n) bits, must read O(n) bits - Pipelining gives O(1) AMORTIZED per candidate (throughput, not latency) - True O(1) end-to-end requires all three in ONE physical step (DNA that hybridizes INTO a CRT-reconstructing structure that self-verifies) — speculative, not proven |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| adversarial_review | ||
| build_logs | ||
| concept_map | ||
| diagrams | ||
| first_principles | ||
| fundamental_math | ||
| refactor | ||
| research | ||
| reviews | ||
| ARCHITECTURE.md | ||
| CLAIMS_STATUS.md | ||
| cmix_epigenetic_analysis.md | ||
| FIX_DESIGN.md | ||
| generate_porting_candidates.py | ||
| generate_project_map.py | ||
| generate_research_stack_usage_map.py | ||
| GLOSSARY.md | ||
| GLOSSARY_ALLOWLIST.md | ||
| GOORMAGHTIGH_SPECTRAL.md | ||
| gw_compression_honest_result.md | ||
| PROJECT_MAP.json | ||
| PROJECT_MAP.md | ||
| research_stack_usage_graph_thumb.png | ||
| review_findings.md | ||
| SPECTRAL_CODEBOOK_ANALYSIS.md | ||
| SPECTRAL_CODEBOOK_GENERATOR.md | ||
| THEOREM_STACK.md | ||
| weird_machine_conservation_law.md | ||
