3 ms·
I also wonder why that number. But as others said, it's a pretty famous number all by itself so it makes sense for there to be some notice paid to that- if ther
by edanm 7y ago
I also wonder why that number. But as others said, it's a pretty famous number all by itself so it makes sense for there to be some notice paid to that- if there were no hyperlink I would've thought it's weird and maybe someone made a mistake.
- nabla9 7y ago1729 has no special meaning for the multiplication algorithm. In the paper Harvey writes: > In Section 5 we establish (1.3) with the explicit constant K= 1728, and in Section 5.4 we list some optimisations that improve it to K= 8. > In Section 5, we will simply take d:= 1729 (any constant larger than K would do)
- zeristor 7y agoNo mention of the number of dimensions for Fourier transform multiplication though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1729_(number) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1729_(number)