My answers, am I correct?

[woodturner550]

Stopwatch Problems logic:
1. Time, it includes hours, minutes, seconds and nanoseconds. True or False
2. Clicking the button on a stopwatch at the start of an event marks the beginning of the event. True or False
3. The time value of the beginning of the event CANNOT be known before the stopwatch button is pushed at start of event. True or False
4. Output of a digital stopwatch CANNOT be known before it appears on screen. True or False
5. Therefore, time can be used as an unknowable data point. True or False

***************************

My answers, am I correct?

#1 We all know time includes nanoseconds.... so true.

#2 Yes when using a stopwatch, the botton starts and finishes the time event.... so true

#3 Time is linear, therefore as time passes you cannot know the exact nanosecond that is passing. It is like a big wheel with hour, minutes, seconds and nanoseconds marks. As it spins you grab a time. One cannot know the exact nanosecond in time you grabbed till you look at it..... so true

#4 Time is linear, therefore as time passes you cannot know the exact nanosecond that is passing.... so true.

#5 it self explanatory...... so true.



Please, comment. Thank

 

[logistic_guy]

Stopwatch Problems logic:
1. Time, it includes hours, minutes, seconds and nanoseconds. True or False
2. Clicking the button on a stopwatch at the start of an event marks the beginning of the event. True or False
3. The time value of the beginning of the event CANNOT be known before the stopwatch button is pushed at start of event. True or False
4. Output of a digital stopwatch CANNOT be known before it appears on screen. True or False
5. Therefore, time can be used as an unknowable data point. True or False

I am not here to answer your questions. But you said that any comment is welcome, so here is my comment. I got up this morning bored and what I did was to write a generating random number program from scratch using the $\displaystyle \text{C}$ programming language. My idea is not NEW and it has been there since $\displaystyle 1978$. Here is a screenshot.



What is this program doing? It is like throwing a real dice $\displaystyle 6000$ times. Is the dice fair? From the results, we can conclude that it is a fair dice since the results are almost the same.

When they first introduced this idea, they had problems because, for example, when you run this code two times say to generate a 5 random numbers it will give you exactly the same sequence.

First run: $\displaystyle 3 1 0 0 9$
Second run: $\displaystyle 3 1 0 0 9$

It does not matter how many times you run this program, it will give you the same exact sequence (because it always uses the same $\displaystyle \textcolor{red}{\bold{seed}}$, unless you change it manually which is practically not good). So how did they fix this problem? They solved it by linking the random function to the clock of the computer.

If you run the program, say, at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$, it will give you a seed number that is the number of seconds in 7 hours. In this case, the $\displaystyle \textcolor{red}{\bold{seed}} = 25,200 \ \text{seconds}$.

At the beginning of the creation of this idea, everything was fine. It was almost impossible to get the same sequence until some smart A S S E S came around to realize that if you run the program at the same time every day, you get the same sequence. And they used that glitch for their benefit to win not millions but thousands of dollars in games involving this system.

Then, programmers developed the idea of counting the number of seconds since $\displaystyle 1970$. That is when you run the program at January first $\displaystyle 2026$ at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$, the seed number will be the total number of seconds from January first $\displaystyle 1970$ at $\displaystyle 00 \ \text{AM}$ to January first $\displaystyle 2026$ at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$. Therefore, if you run this program at January second $\displaystyle 2026$ at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$, you will have to add $\displaystyle 24 \ \text{hours}$ to yesterday seed, that is $\displaystyle 86,400$ more $\displaystyle \text{seconds}$. Each seed generate a unique sequence, so this guaranteed that no body will know about the next sequence of numbers.

Let us say that you used all the combinations of generating a $\displaystyle 10$ random digits-number. In this case, the next sequences must repeat themselves in different seeds. Even if this happens, it is almost impossible to know that two seeds generate the same sequence.

It was discovered later that even if you did not run out of all combinations, two seeds can generate the same sequence. This means that even this smart developed idea in the $\displaystyle \text{C}$ programming language which uses $\displaystyle \text{srand( time( \textcolor{blue}{\text{NULL}} ))}$ is not cryptographically strong.

And it can be cracked even without the need of using quantum computing. Imagine what will happen if quantum computing was used!

I don't know how to answer your questions but I am fully agreed with your idea if it can generate unpredictable random numbers based on unknown future information that even quantum computing cannot crack!

 

[woodturner550]

I am not here to answer your questions. But you said that any comment is welcome, so here is my comment. I got up this morning bored and what I did was to write a generating random number program from scratch using the $\displaystyle \text{C}$ programming language. My idea is not NEW and it has been there since $\displaystyle 1978$. Here is a screenshot.

View attachment 39567

What is this program doing? It is like throwing a real dice $\displaystyle 6000$ times. Is the dice fair? From the results, we can conclude that it is a fair dice since the results are almost the same.

When they first introduced this idea, they had problems because, for example, when you run this code two times say to generate a 5 random numbers it will give you exactly the same sequence.

First run: $\displaystyle 3 1 0 0 9$
Second run: $\displaystyle 3 1 0 0 9$

It does not matter how many times you run this program, it will give you the same exact sequence (because it always uses the same $\displaystyle \textcolor{red}{\bold{seed}}$, unless you change it manually which is practically not good). So how did they fix this problem? They solved it by linking the random function to the clock of the computer.

If you run the program, say, at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$, it will give you a seed number that is the number of seconds in 7 hours. In this case, the $\displaystyle \textcolor{red}{\bold{seed}} = 25,200 \ \text{seconds}$.

At the beginning of the creation of this idea, everything was fine. It was almost impossible to get the same sequence until some smart A S S E S came around to realize that if you run the program at the same time every day, you get the same sequence. And they used that glitch for their benefit to win not millions but thousands of dollars in games involving this system.

Then, programmers developed the idea of counting the number of seconds since $\displaystyle 1970$. That is when you run the program at January first $\displaystyle 2026$ at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$, the seed number will be the total number of seconds from January first $\displaystyle 1970$ at $\displaystyle 00 \ \text{AM}$ to January first $\displaystyle 2026$ at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$. Therefore, if you run this program at January second $\displaystyle 2026$ at $\displaystyle 7 \ \text{AM}$, you will have to add $\displaystyle 24 \ \text{hours}$ to yesterday seed, that is $\displaystyle 86,400$ more $\displaystyle \text{seconds}$. Each seed generate a unique sequence, so this guaranteed that no body will know about the next sequence of numbers.

Let us say that you used all the combinations of generating a $\displaystyle 10$ random digits-number. In this case, the next sequences must repeat themselves in different seeds. Even if this happens, it is almost impossible to know that two seeds generate the same sequence.

It was discovered later that even if you did not run out of all combinations, two seeds can generate the same sequence. This means that even this smart developed idea in the $\displaystyle \text{C}$ programming language which uses $\displaystyle \text{srand( time( \textcolor{blue}{\text{NULL}} ))}$ is not cryptographically strong.

And it can be cracked even without the need of using quantum computing. Imagine what will happen if quantum computing was used!

I don't know how to answer your questions but I am fully agreed with your idea if it can generate unpredictable random numbers based on unknown future information that even quantum computing cannot crack!

Thank you for you time and comments. The unpredictable random numbers is proved in the RN data file.

 

[woodturner550]

If wanted I will explain the how and why this work and is twice unbreakable (once because of unknowable and the output of binary has no connection to times used.

Author: Leonard Dye, tomanytroubles@gmail.com, May 31, 2024 - Copyrighted 10/14/2023

import time
import random

def challenge():
number_of_needed_numbers = 10
count = 0
lowest_random_number_needed = 0
highest_random_number_needed = 1

while count < number_of_needed_numbers:
start_time = time.time() # get first time
print("start time ", start_time)
time.sleep(0.00000000000001) # wait
end_time = time.time() # get second time
print("end time ", end_time)
low_time = ((end_time + start_time) / 2) # covert to one time
print("low time ", low_time)
start_time1 = time.time() # get third time
print("start time1 ", start_time1)
time.sleep(0.00000000000001) # wait
end_time1 = time.time() # get fourth time
print("end time1 ", end_time1)
high_time = ((end_time1 + start_time1) / 2) # convert to one time
print("high time ", high_time)
random.seed((high_time + low_time) / 2)
random_number = random.randint(lowest_random_number_needed, highest_random_number_needed)
count += 1
print(random_number)
print("")
print("")

if __name__ == '__main__':
challenge() # go to top, 'def challenge'



All files can be found at: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/home. Main data file is ‘RN Data.xlsx’. 48 mb

Thanks for reading and commenting.

 

[woodturner550]

Something to ponder: How many unknowables are there? Not all useable for making random numbers. But what other uses?

This area of research is rich with 'new knowledge or understanding'. It is the one thing I wish I had more time to do, as far as projects. But I might have to live another century to do that properly.

 

[woodturner550]

It is with a heavy heart, for ‘my mental health’ I must let this go. I have spent almost a year trying to get this ’new knowledge’ out to the world. Logic tells me that after this amount of effort with NO interest, let it go.

Letter to chancellor of Berkely University:

Mr. Lyons,

I have ‘Possible new knowledge’ in creating “REAL” random numbers on any computer that can run the Python language. There in lies the problem. Educators have been instructing that computers CAN NOT make real random numbers because they only follow a set of instruction and will ALWAYS have the same output. This has been true, only because no one has been able to show that it is untrue. I can.

An important thought process: Remember the blind persons describing the elephant by what they thought the elephant was after being introduced to different parts of the elephant. Leg= tree, tail= rope. It was the same elephant.

Everyday time, we take it for granted as it rules our lives. Could there be other dimensions of time? Yes. Time can be an ‘unknowable data point.’ That is new and will secure our world.

Explanation: Stopwatch Problems logic: These are NOT trick questions! I will show my answers below.

1. Time, it includes hours, minutes, seconds, and nanoseconds. True or False?
2. Clicking the button at the start of an event marks the beginning of the event. True or False?
3. The value of the beginning of the event CANNOT be known before it happens. True or False?
4. Output of a digital stopwatch CANNOT be known before it appears on screen. True or False?
5. Therefore, time can be used as an unknowable data point. True or False?

My answers:

#1 We all know time includes nanoseconds.... So true.

#2 Yes when using a stopwatch, the button starts and finishes the time event.... So true

#3 Time is linear, therefore as time passes you cannot know the exact nanosecond that is passing. It is like a big wheel with hours, minutes, seconds, and nanoseconds marks. As it spins you grab a time. One cannot know the exact time you grabbed till you look at it. So true

#4 Time is linear, therefore as time passes you cannot know the exact nanosecond that is passing.... so true.

#5 itself explanatory...... So true.

This is just deductive logic, the root of all math.

This is one half of what I have found. Problem is I cannot get this finished project seen by the correct people. People I believe need to see this is: Statistician and cryptography experts. Looking at proof of randomness, in data tables.

I am 74 years old, 60% disabled veteran, home bound. I would like to be able to give this knowledge to the world. Without unbreakable encryption humanity can be enslaved by those with quantum computers because they can read everything.

I hope you can help. Thanks for your time, I do not have much left.

Leonard Dye

tomanytroubles@gmail.com



Not even an email acknowledging receipt of the email. Just proves ‘you can lead a horse to water, but you CANNOT make it drink. I wish the world well. I’m glad I don’t have to put up for much longer with a messed-up world caused by the rich and powerful. Humanity is enslaved without bars by the rich and powerful. How many billions are they spending to enslave humanity? Why is humanity so uneducated by the rich (little logic, base of mathematics) that are in control? Answer: Deductive logic leads to clear thinking. It is not easy to lead educated citizens down the merry path earth is on (wars, poverty while rich in every country live very well).

HEADLINE: Quantum Scientists Have Built a New Math of Cryptography



Respectfully,

Leonard Dye

tomanytroubles@gmail

 

[lookagain]

It is with a heavy heart, for ‘my mental health’ I must let this go. I have spent almost a year trying to get this ’new knowledge’ out to the world. Logic tells me that after this amount of effort with NO interest, let it go.

Letter to chancellor of Berkely University:

Mr. Lyons,

I have ‘Possible new knowledge’ in creating “REAL” random numbers on any computer that can run the Python language. There in lies the problem. Educators have been instructing that computers CAN NOT make real random numbers because they only follow a set of instruction and will ALWAYS have the same output. This has been true, only because no one has been able to show that it is untrue. I can.

An important thought process: Remember the blind persons describing the elephant by what they thought the elephant was after being introduced to different parts of the elephant. Leg= tree, tail= rope. It was the same elephant.

Everyday time, we take it for granted as it rules our lives. Could there be other dimensions of time? Yes. Time can be an ‘unknowable data point.’ That is new and will secure our world.

Explanation: Stopwatch Problems logic: These are NOT trick questions! I will show my answers below.

1. Time, it includes hours, minutes, seconds, and nanoseconds. True or False?
2. Clicking the button at the start of an event marks the beginning of the event. True or False?
3. The value of the beginning of the event CANNOT be known before it happens. True or False?
4. Output of a digital stopwatch CANNOT be known before it appears on screen. True or False?
5. Therefore, time can be used as an unknowable data point. True or False?

My answers:

#1 We all know time includes nanoseconds.... So true.

#2 Yes when using a stopwatch, the button starts and finishes the time event.... So true

#3 Time is linear, therefore as time passes you cannot know the exact nanosecond that is passing. It is like a big wheel with hours, minutes, seconds, and nanoseconds marks. As it spins you grab a time. One cannot know the exact time you grabbed till you look at it. So true

#4 Time is linear, therefore as time passes you cannot know the exact nanosecond that is passing.... so true.

#5 itself explanatory...... So true.

This is just deductive logic, the root of all math.

This is one half of what I have found. Problem is I cannot get this finished project seen by the correct people. People I believe need to see this is: Statistician and cryptography experts. Looking at proof of randomness, in data tables.

I am 74 years old, 60% disabled veteran, home bound. I would like to be able to give this knowledge to the world. Without unbreakable encryption humanity can be enslaved by those with quantum computers because they can read everything.

I hope you can help. Thanks for your time, I do not have much left.

Leonard Dye

tomanytroubles@gmail.com



Not even an email acknowledging receipt of the email. Just proves ‘you can lead a horse to water, but you CANNOT make it drink. I wish the world well. I’m glad I don’t have to put up for much longer with a messed-up world caused by the rich and powerful. Humanity is enslaved without bars by the rich and powerful. How many billions are they spending to enslave humanity? Why is humanity so uneducated by the rich (little logic, base of mathematics) that are in control? Answer: Deductive logic leads to clear thinking. It is not easy to lead educated citizens down the merry path earth is on (wars, poverty while rich in every country live very well).

HEADLINE: Quantum Scientists Have Built a New Math of Cryptography



Respectfully,

Leonard Dye

tomanytroubles@gmail

Stop spamming this post!