
03-28-2005, 10:48 PM
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,053
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jseal
BIGbad,
That is what happens with quantum entanglement.
|
...or in the immortal words of the foremost theologian on the subject of 
__________________
R.I.P.
DAM THE MAN!
|

03-29-2005, 05:45 AM
|
 |
♦*♥Moderatrix♥*♦
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: on top of it all
Posts: 50,568
|
|
OMFG~~~~~> rofpmpl
(((((((BIGbad))))))))
|

03-29-2005, 06:18 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 541,353
|
|
__________________
Eudaimonia
|

03-29-2005, 07:39 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 541,353
|
|
PalaceGuard,
Are you familiar with the work of Claude Shannon? 
__________________
Eudaimonia
|

03-29-2005, 02:31 PM
|
 |
1 of 8,213,984,035
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 41.36N-81.32W
Posts: 21,540
|
|
__________________
PANTIES
the best thing next to cuchie
"If God didn't want you to play with it, He would have put it between your shoulder blades,..... not at the end of your arm"
Except for speculation, we ONLY have NOW and EACHOTHER!
real world of cyber people ~ Pixies ~ real people of the cyber world
|

03-29-2005, 03:30 PM
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,053
|
|
All:
That "big dummy" was directed at myself for pointing out what was so obviously pointed out by the gentlemen above. If my message was misconstrued by anyone I apologize. Again I am a "big dummy". I never should have weighed in on this one with the big dogs.
BB
__________________
R.I.P.
DAM THE MAN!
|

03-29-2005, 09:18 PM
|
 |
Open to suggestions.
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 228
|
|
jseal - You wouldn't, by any chance, be referring to Claude Shannon's "A mathematical theory of communication", would you?
__________________
Anytime. Anywhere.
|

03-30-2005, 01:12 AM
|
 |
1 of 8,213,984,035
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 41.36N-81.32W
Posts: 21,540
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGbad
All:
That "big dummy" was directed at myself for pointing out what was so obviously pointed out by the gentlemen above. If my message was misconstrued by anyone I apologize. ....
BB
|
Nothing miscionstrued and you can't be an indian giver!  If we get a tool, we get to ise it where ever it fits. 
__________________
PANTIES
the best thing next to cuchie
"If God didn't want you to play with it, He would have put it between your shoulder blades,..... not at the end of your arm"
Except for speculation, we ONLY have NOW and EACHOTHER!
real world of cyber people ~ Pixies ~ real people of the cyber world
|

03-30-2005, 05:57 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 541,353
|
|
PalaceGuard,
Yes sir, I believe that is the one. Do you think it may be applicable in this instance? 
__________________
Eudaimonia
|

03-30-2005, 07:06 PM
|
 |
Open to suggestions.
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 228
|
|
jseal – Well, a portion of it. I do think that the Signal/Noise ratio is relevant in this instance.
In information theory, the Shannon-Hartley theorem computes the maximum amount of information (error-free digital data) that can be transmitted over a communication link with some bandwidth in the presence of noise interference.
We’re facing a similar situation here, where packets of data are being passed through a particular messaging system with a seemingly unavoidable amount of noise. The amount of information which may be carried here is more or less limited by the number and size of the packets of useless data.
__________________
Anytime. Anywhere.
|

03-31-2005, 07:50 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 541,353
|
|
PalaceGuard,
How significant is this situation?
__________________
Eudaimonia
|

03-31-2005, 06:22 PM
|
 |
Open to suggestions.
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 228
|
|
jseal - It depends on the communication channel. In this instance there are many concurrent channels. Assume for the sake of simplicity that all the active channels have the same bandwidth. Some have much higher information content than others. Those channels with high information content are more sensitive to noise degradation than those which don't.
Actually, the usefulness of the messaging system as a whole becomes inversely proportional to the total system noise at high noise levels.
Can't stay tonight - gotta go.
__________________
Anytime. Anywhere.
|

04-01-2005, 08:39 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 541,353
|
|
PalaceGuard,
What kind of noise causes the degradation?
__________________
Eudaimonia
|

04-01-2005, 08:20 PM
|
 |
Open to suggestions.
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 228
|
|
Jseal – It may better to think of noise as “interference” rather than something related to sound. On an analogue line, this interference with the data (signal) does sound like noise. On a digital line, a bit is a bit, so thinking of noise as interference is more useful. The root problem remains unchanged, which is first how to discriminate between the signal (data) and the noise (interference) and also, when approaching the bandwidth limits of the channel, that the noise can elbow the signal aside.
It doesn’t matter what your messaging system is – they all have these problems.
__________________
Anytime. Anywhere.
|

04-02-2005, 09:42 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 541,353
|
|
PalaceGuard,
The messaging system must be open enough to enable a complete range of messages, but this openness admits the interference. So noise/interference is an intractable engineering issue. A messaging system must admit noise to admit data, so some portion of the data must be used to identify it as data rather than noise.
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:51 AM.
|