new idea for random number generation

[juan]

On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 14:18:43 -0400
Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net> wrote:

 
> >> Only physical sources can generate real entropy in this sense:
> >> Decaying isotopes, noise from a leaky diode, tumbling dice,
> >> snapshots of variable hardware states in a computer (least
> >> significant n. digits of CPU temperature, fan speed, keystroke
> >> intervals, etc.) do qualify as entropy;
> > 
> > That's part of the question, are those things deterministic, albeit
> > at several more orders maginitiudes than our computers?
> 
> Again, the outputs of these processes can not be predicted unless
> their inputs are under precise control, 


	and in the case of noise in semiconductors, in theory you'd
	need knowledge of the state of a few million atoms. How many
	atoms in say 1mg of silicon?* 

	Even the most deranged, braind-dead-public-education 'believers'
	in 'science' might conclude that no technological device can
	'predict' noise inside a $0.01 diode.


*silicon's molar mass is 28 so, 28g of silicon have 6x10^23 atoms**  -
So 1mg of silicon has ~ 2x10^18 atoms - give or take a few decades. 



**I always wonder where the fuck does that number come from, but I'm
asuming it's more or less correct.

	
	bottom line, looks like trivial hardware random number
	generators can be built easily, without any mathematical pseudo
	random bullshit.

	http://www.cryogenius.com/hardware/rng/

	http://holdenc.altervista.org/avalanche/

	et cetera




> which in practical situations
> they are not.  A big factor here is that the random number generators
> used to make cryptographic keys are under the control of the user (or
> had better be!), and the user will act to assure that the variables
> driving the generator are not monitored to produce predetermined
> outputs.
> 
> > I ask this semi-rhetorically, because in my cosmology, the universe
> > must have some non-determinism in order for life to appear.
> 
> This far, physics describes a Universe where the balance of Order and
> Chaos is ideal for creating life.  Almost as if somebody set that up
> on purpose.  To put a stop to that kind of "superstitious"
> speculation, some physicists propose that a vast, unlimited number of
> distinct universes must exist, each with its own physical laws, where
> only a few have conditions supporting the development of life.  But
> if so, there must be a larger cosmic context in which all these
> universes happen, and the same speculation arises - how did this
> massively parallel trial and error process get started?  Which jumps
> us up to yet another "higher" context, etc. ad infinitum.
> 
> Verily, 'tis a mindfucker.
> 
> :o)
> 
> 
>