Junction Noise

[jhaible]

> Well, you math weenies have one on me. I can tell you that I have studied
PRN
> sources with FFT analysers, and the output falls into well defined
buckets. In
> between the buckets there are definite holes: frequencies with no energy.
My
> idea was to frequency modulate the clock with another unrelated PRN. This
would
> smear out the energy and fill in the holes. This I believe would make for
better
> "noise".

If you just play your PRN sequence _once_, you should have a continuous
spectrum.
(But only for a limited time, unfortunately.)
The more often you repeat the same cycle, the less "smearing" you will get,
and
at infinite repetition you'll have discrete frequencies.
So altering the sequence, or the playback speed of the same sequence,
between
every cycle, must surely help to preserve the "smearing". With another PRN
serving
as a modulation source, the variations will not be unlimited either. You
will
get some repetition as well - only much later. It would surely be an
improovement
compared with one single PRN.
The big question is, will this improovement be better than simply investing
the additional PRN in an increased length of the first one, rather than
splitting in
two PRNs and finding an optimal modulation algorithm ?
What if for a certain number of flipflops the linear arrangement of all
flipflops
*is* the best algorithm ?
(I cannot answer this.)

JH.