Oh, okay, I didn't initially realise that we weren't supposed to be throwing away randomness, but re-reading I've noticed the bits/click references which could be read to imply it.
However, if there is a significant time interval between clicks you could get even more bits/click though (by treating it as frequency modulated wave). But then there might be a problem due to there being no upper bound on the wavelength. But how about forcing a click every x ms in that case? Not sure it would work...
Incidentally, couldn't discarding intervals smaller than the recovery time still cause problems because (and I'm thinking in terms of Geiger counters with high voltage across a gas that is ionized and conducts type things here) a second particle entering the detector during the recovery period would cause the recovery time to be extended, i.e. a constant stream of particles might cause the counter never to register anything past the first click?
(Even though it's not solid state I thought a spinning lead disc might be quite cute.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2002-11-25 10:58 am (UTC)However, if there is a significant time interval between clicks you could get even more bits/click though (by treating it as frequency modulated wave). But then there might be a problem due to there being no upper bound on the wavelength. But how about forcing a click every x ms in that case? Not sure it would work...
Incidentally, couldn't discarding intervals smaller than the recovery time still cause problems because (and I'm thinking in terms of Geiger counters with high voltage across a gas that is ionized and conducts type things here) a second particle entering the detector during the recovery period would cause the recovery time to be extended, i.e. a constant stream of particles might cause the counter never to register anything past the first click?
(Even though it's not solid state I thought a spinning lead disc might be quite cute.)