|
|
Re: Simple random number generator?
Posted:
Dec 25, 2012 6:00 PM
|
|
On 25 Dec 2012 20:14:27 +0200, Phil Carmody wrote:
>Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> writes:
>> In article <87licvisn2.fsf@bazspaz.fatphil.org>,
>> Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> writes:
>> > > In article
>> > > <0.ef56b5652decd19bb478.20121128013501GMT.87k3t6v7ay.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
>> > > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Good quality, hardware-generated random number sequences (if our current
>> > > > understanding of quantum effects is correct) are random in a different
>> > > > way to the digits of pi. It helps if the terminology is be able to
>> > > > distinguish between them.
>> > >
>> > > I do not see how quantum effects can be used to generate
>> > > random sequences. Coherent systems are stable and highly,
>> > > if not perfectly, predictable.
>> > >
>> > > Hardware generated random sequences usually read Schottky
>> > > noise off some device (a sound card in a computer) and use
>> > > that. This can be modeled using entirely classical physics.
>> >
>> > Are you sure? Shottky noise is white noise, and thus is
>> > indistinguishable from thermal (Johnson-Nyquist) noise.
>> > So you can statistically model it the same way, but that
>> > doesn't mean it's actually caused by classical mechanics.
>> > I can't find any references to Shottky noise that don't
>> > mention some quantum effect.
>>
>> _What_ quantum effect?
>
>Things like photons at discrete energy levels. Or electrons
>jumping between discrete energy levels.
Why are jumps between discrete energy levels necessarily random?
Why can they not be deterministic and chaotic based on more parameters
than we are tracking?
If radioactive decay is random, how are we able to govern the rate of
decay in a reactor?
We are not similarly able to affect the outcome when flipping 1000
coins simultaneously and nondeterministically.
|
|
