quentron.com

[sarkeizen]

Sarkeizen'So again I don't see how a prism is relevant.'

if a prism can

You already said it can't sort like a computer right? or did you?  I'm losing track. Please clarify.

Were you wrong when you said: "Nonono..." or can you tell me how you would encode the words from a play on it.

[profitis]

Mr sarkeizen I'm going to get angry now.a prism SORTS INFORMATION INSTANTLY.a quenco SORTS INFORMATION INSTANTLY.that is all that is relevant to your ANTI-SORTING-INSTANTLY BBBV and proves that your theorem is inappropriate as an anti-quenco argument man.beyond doubt

[lumen]

You didn't answer my question.  Will an simulation which uses a PRNG which is guaranteed to go through every permutation at some point model this sorting behavior?

While you're thinking about that let's get back to you masturbating over thermal noise RNGs.What you want to say is that given a sufficient number of trials they will return the same result once in the total number of permutations between the two RNGs.  i.e. If you have a eight bit RNGs you will get the same result 1 in 65536 times.

That's assuming no bias and most thermal RNGs do have a little bias.

The Pseudo Random Number Generator can simulate the results but not the sorting behavior and will produce the same number on two computers showing that it is not random but Pseudo random or simulated.

Random Noise Generators have their own problems in that they tend to produce an equal number of 1's to 0's but when working with binary computers the result becomes true random in that when checked for a 1 or 0 the chance is always random. You can simply fill out any binary number in any order with the output of the RNG and the result is true random.

Two computers deriving numbers from their own RNG device will produce different numbers when all else is equal except for chance.

[sarkeizen]

Mr sarkeizen I'm going to get angry now

Look was it unclear to you that we were talking about something that worked like a computer?  Even when you said: "just like a computer"?
Was it unclear to you that we were talking about sorting arbitrarily large things? Even when I asked you specifically about sorting arbitrarily large things?
So now you want to talk about something that you claim can't sort "like a computer" right? and can't sort "arbitrarily large things" right?
Your desire to fabricate some argument that is entirely different than the one I laid out carefully through all your dancing around the question posts.  Is simply: Not. My. Problem.  Either address the thing that was being clearly discussed or admit you lost.

[sarkeizen]

The Pseudo Random Number Generator can simulate the results but not the sorting behavior

So even when we go through ALL POSSIBLE OUTCOMES of molecular movement in your "environment" - not one of those is sorted?