Overclock Tick and send to blue (is maybe possible ?)

[Tepeix]

Just get this idea.

It's an old dream to use the ticker to influence streaming blue signal.
(Even if i not sure what really could be a good reason to do this;)

But when overclocking the tick it could not send faster than 100hz,
because every faster tick would be send in a same sample.

Here's a way to take into account those faster ticks..
But which purpose could it serve ?)

[Spogg]

It’s always fun to fool around with stuff like this!

But, as you say, it’s not clear what this could be useful for. For someone reading this who doesn’t realise, I should mention that any process in the green domain cannot be relied on for accurate and repeatable timing performance. Green processing is carried out when there is time, and this can be influenced by the size and complexity of the schematic. Blue and white audio stream processing has the highest priority and green is the lowest. The other thing is that a plugin which relies on green timing anywhere will give different results to a schematic because in the FS edit environment there are far more overheads.

[Tepeix]

Thanks Spogg and sorry i must have precise what you say !!

Forget that some day ago i was even myself learning more about this green blue interaction..

I'm not even sure i will work to find a purpose in this, because it could be so bad for the sound or
anything could better be done (i suppose) with blue in hop for dsp code or skip for asm.
And i have so much others better thinks to works on..

I have dream a lot to use tick in this crazy way.. But when i find a way to do so,
i realize that it's probably better to use another way like a sort of blue tick..

Maybe a purpose could be to make a large array of random value with overclocked ticks.
Convert to mem. Then read one value after the others..
But this is maybe slower than another code solution, and not really the process in the example..

Or maybe a special dezip in asm but once again what is the real gain ?

Also, green process could lead to invisible big spike in cpu.
Trying to resample some big arrays in green, i was getting spike of 7% in task manager,
when in flowstone the cpu meter's was not moving.

I also think about a sort of stabilisator but don't know if it could be really reliable..
(hard to test on many computer..)

[Tepeix]

I try to make a tick stabilisator but it might be a loose of time or hack that make no sense.)
Just trying for now to read the speed of the tick but i'm not sure my method is reliable.
The thing go back from blue to green to reset so maybe it's another imprecision.

In my computer it read 14 to 1.
14000 to 1000 trigger in 0.1s With a loop 1000 to overclock the ticks.
After a little time decimal most time get rounded..
Not sure this work well..

[nix]

Ruby is pretty tight on timing,
it's possible to run sort of even durations at say 1000hz,
depending on what/how it is plugged down the line

-try feeding the analyzer back on itself mate,
I was going to do that sometime

[Spogg]

Oh sweet nostalgia!

I remember my early steps with FS trying to work out what could be done with green and finding out the limitations, and not really understanding why until I asked here later on. I would venture to say it’s the best way to learn!

Have fun!

[Tepeix]

Yep the Ruby tick do it fine, but it take more cpu.
That's all my paradox to try yo use a low priority process like an high trying to stabilize it;)
Which could maybe lead to the same cpu...
Now i try to make a slow ruby tick that feed normal multiplying tick.
But i think and i read that it's the same, when the tick go in green prim it is receive in a green timing..
I also try the analyser. But not sure how to feed it.
Works when i connect a De-threader after the string out then feed the recalculate.

That's the tick obsession..
I could even imagine that time itself is not regular but feed with some ticks.)

(That's why time is slower when proximal to a big mass, they are more calculations to do so it slow down the ticks)

[billv]

Here's some blue tickers...in case you feel like experimenting in the blue....

Blue_tickers.fsm

(269.89 KiB) Downloaded 590 times

[Duckett]

More things to play with, hooray!

Also, it's a pretty big question- "Is spacetime fundamentally continuous or discrete (analog or digital)?"

Since we're probably not quite as clever as we believe we are, the answer is probably not quite what we currently think it is, but learning about things like the Casimir effect, Susskind's "holographic principle", quantum foam, etc.
leads me to think it's dual in nature, in the same manner as wave/particle duality (which, again, is a distinction between discrete and continuous) as far as we can understand or make practical use of it.. if you actually enjoy delving into this sort of stuff, may I recommend Prof. Y. Ng's ""Towards a Holographic Theory of Cosmology — Threads in a Tapestry" https://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.3918.pdf

Hope y'all aren't ticked off at the digression

[tulamide]

More things to play with, hooray!

Also, it's a pretty big question- "Is spacetime fundamentally continuous or discrete (analog or digital)?"

Since we're probably not quite as clever as we believe we are, the answer is probably not quite what we currently think it is, but learning about things like the Casimir effect, Susskind's "holographic principle", quantum foam, etc.
leads me to think it's dual in nature, in the same manner as wave/particle duality (which, again, is a distinction between discrete and continuous) as far as we can understand or make practical use of it.. if you actually enjoy delving into this sort of stuff, may I recommend Prof. Y. Ng's ""Towards a Holographic Theory of Cosmology — Threads in a Tapestry" https://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.3918.pdf

Hope y'all aren't ticked off at the digression

We only sense some things as having several properties at the same time, because we haven't yet understood its true property. For example, I find it confusing that people try to give time a globally true property, when it is nothing else than a human concept, that doesn't exist in nature. There is no way to measure time directly, and of course no way to name its property. We define time through movement, and movement only. Which tells us, without movement there is no time existing. That's what allows us, for example, to stop a film at any point. It isn't just slowing down to an unnoticable movement, it is wiped out of existence. But something that only exists while we are observing something else, is at best an aspect of that something. Not a property on its own. And that leads to our inability to tell what light is. We sense it as two different properties, depending on us observing it. It's a little bit like 2D people would fail to understand the concept of 3D.
And therefore time is everything you want it to be at the same time. Analogous, when the observed object is moving analogous, and discrete, when the observed object is moving discretely. And it can be a space, if the object observed is multi-dimensional.