Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!sri-spam!sri-unix!quintus!ok
From: ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Random Numbers ...
Message-ID: <709@cresswell.quintus.UUCP>
Date: 29 Feb 88 07:22:39 GMT
References: <11972@brl-adm.ARPA> <7097@sol.ARPA> <3472@bobkat.UUCP> <690@l.cc.purdue.edu>
Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Mountain View, CA
Lines: 10

In article <690@l.cc.purdue.edu>, cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
> Second, get some physical random bits.
> And make sure that all bits are random.
Um, how *do* you "make sure that all bits are random"?
Physical random numbers aren't all that simple, either.
Radioactives decay, noise diodes die, electrochemical methods have
hazards of their own, the noise spectrum of the source depends on
the ambient temperature, and so on.  In effect, you have to
re-validate a physical source each time you use it.
Journals like JASA and Applied Statistics seem to be happy with the
use of pseudo-random numbers in Monte Carlo studies.