Is that you spreading “it” on your face again?
Does the diebiebms function on the go? Lile does it have an app? I like the fact I can have a look while I’m not home 
Also you missed a spot there
So i see, in that case when they die, they die aprox at the same time aswell right? I can understand if maybe one dies.
However arent the most problems with the remotes? It seems like they are way more complicated or isnt this the case?
If there are differences in the positioning on the board between the 2 receivers, and manufacturing differences between them as well, one of the 2 receivers can be more susceptible to interference than the other one, leading to a much greater delay in the second one failing than can be explained by the speed of light alone.
It works with Metr Pro, has an LCD for status.
In conjunction with an OSRR receiver you can pull up the full tool wirelessly too. Pretty great, just wish it were smaller…
for example if one receiver is on one side of the board and the other receiver is on the other side, the interference that takes out one of the receivers could be blocked by the board itself from the perspective of the other receiver.
Metr is too marked up for my blood. I have a cheap hm10 plugged into both my bms AND my esc. When power is off, I have access to the bms. When power is on I have access to the esc
at a basic physics level each photon can only be seen by one observer. so a single photon of interference can’t possibly affect 2 receivers.
So redundant Bluetooth?
What about quantum receivers?
a reception counts as a measurement, and any measurement destroys the original photon. you can’t measure a single photon twice.
consider a single low energy electron positron annihilation event. 2 gamma rays (photons) are produced which travel apart at exactly 180 degrees from the center of mass rest frame. one of the photons hits the wall. alice is stationary with respect to the center of mass of the collision and bob is whizzing by the collision close to the speed of light. only one of them can measure the photon which didn’t hit the wall. even though both photons had the same energy, wavelength and are traveling in opposite directions when observed from the rest frame of the center of mass, if stationary alice measures the photon that didn’t hit the wall she sees it has exactly the rest energy of the electron, but if bob measures the photon, he will say it has much more energy than the electron rest mass, a different wavelength, and he will see the photon traveling from a different direction than alice, because of the relativistic aberration. but they can’t compare their measurements because only one of them can measure the single photon.
^this diagram shows ±0.5 deg from 180 deg because the collision center of mass won’t necessarily be stationary to the detectors.
Your favorite show is Rick and Morty
Why are you giving him the ultimate compliment?
Can’t be true. I understand Rick and Morty.
^^SAMEchar
In an electron positron annihilation event, two photons are released therefore you could easily identify and detect separate events. Not assuming high energy scenarios including mesons and bosons OBVIOUSLY.
Maybe I’ll give you that one if the photons managed to be redirected to reentangle prior to hitting this wall of observation. Even then that’s an unknown that only Marvel ant man and iron man can prove.
Bob and Alice are already dual receivers in this scenario. Each has their own independent measurements of their respective photons.
A quantum logic gates purpose is to not pass salient on/off signals but intermediate states as well. I believe the intermediate states are driven by all surrounding forces and can be one day be reverse transformed (quantum equivalent of a Fourier or Laplace transform) to provide us with the answers of all time.
brb gotta take 2 more doses and hit some DMT to conceptualize my next reply.