Can Software Display Every Possible Screen Picture Variation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tiger Blood
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pictures Screen
Tiger Blood
Messages
50
Reaction score
11
I don't know if there was talking about this or somebody already did this but do you think it would be possible to make software that shows you all possible pictures variations on your monitor/TV?
What I mean is monitor works on RGB principles and is separated into tiny squares that gives RGB output making a big picture so variations are pretty big and there are more variations to see it in classical 24 frame per second then anyone's life or even universe's life but still if you set it to see every billionth picture or trillionth picture then it maybe could be interesting because you potentially have opportunity to "see everything".

So is there program like that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have to realize what you are asking. Every frame of an analog tv is unique, minor imperfections will guarantee that you never get exactly the same frame, if you watch tv all day it will be just what you asked for. You never really specified what set of pictures from the infinity of pictures you want. You can point a camera at the sky or look at static, whatever you do it will produce a lifetime of unique pictures. Looking at static is probably more close to most of the pictures that are possible. I am sure that there is a static generator somewhere online.
 
Tiger Blood said:
...
So is there program like that?

Such program would be a bunch of nested loops.
Very easy to do, and absolutely useless... :smile:
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.

Similar threads

Back
Top