<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Monte Carlo Spin Simulations of Magnetic Noise -- The Search for Pivoting · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2403.09078/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2403.09078/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Monte Carlo Spin Simulations of Magnetic Noise -- The Search for Pivoting — mentioned by n8m8</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42976401</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2403.09078:42976401</guid><pubDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2025 19:21:14 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Thermal noise entropy is probably good enough for most practical uses, but it&amp;#x27;s still fundamentally producing a seed value that can be captured, misused, or bruteforced, right? Also curious if there are monte-carlo models looking at this to see &amp;quot;how uniformly random&amp;quot; they look. Edit: I think figure 3 in this study is what I&amp;#x27;m looking for. They define the inconsistency I described as &amp;quot;spectral pivoting&amp;quot;. &amp;gt; This discrepancy is because the Mermin-Wagner-Hohenberg theorem holds in the thermodynamic limit, while these simulations are for finite lattices I think thermodynamic limit here means, it…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2403.09078/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cond-mat.mes-hall</category></item></channel></rss>
