From: gts (gts@optexinc.com)
Date: Wed Sep 11 2002 - 20:36:34 MDT
Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Sorry, the removal of the significant digits does, in fact, turn a
> deterministic process into a random one
This is simply untrue. One could for example list a group of irrational
numbers that all start with, for example, ".12" after the decimal point.
By your method you would drop the apparent "significant digits," leaving
only those that appear 3 or more places after the decimal point. But
those numbers would still be determined.
> The human response speed is a rather large
> fraction of a second. Anything smaller than that is just
> noise, i.e. random.
Regardless of the "human response speed," such numbers are determined
and thus pseudorandom. That is, unless you can show me that you are
capable of hitting a key without first determining to do so. :)
> ... the text flow from brain to fingers does not allow the
> individual to accurately adjust tempo to anything shorter than a
> 1/16th second beat rate
Our ability or lack of ability to adjust our typing tempo is beside the
point. It matters only that we determine to hit a key at some moment.
The action is determined and thus not random.
I'll agree however that keystrokes are among the better means of
generating numbers indistinguishable from genuine random numbers. They
are not however genuine random numbers comparable to the truly
undetermined numbers that can be derived from quantum processes. For
most purposes the difference is only philosophical.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:58 MST