Hu: A reduction that is of itself this magnitude has become necessary #<s-fbno>. Why is Web-Sockets needed? Why can’t we just run things through TCP? Why is TCP needed? Why can’t we just throw bits to each other, in the air? The answer to all of these questions lie in quantum | mechanics, and to a specific concept known as note | intervals <Hu et al., ’22>.
H3S1: Note intervals:
Hu: Hu: Music is inherently | quantized, as, despite the fact that a continuous | spectrum of frequencies can be produced, only certain frequencies, at quantized | intervals, will register as a note, and be reductively-remembered by the human brain, as opposed to noise, which is immediately | forgotten. This means that, somewhere in the auditory sensory pathway, there is a quantum | filter. Valid thought line: if only air #, upon some quantized vector, at the note interval, can vibrate a reed, whereas other air, of even the same temperature, and force, does not, then we can find another note interval, to vibrate a window, and any other material. This is the vector of vibration, of air. But by altering some other vector, at its note intervals, we would be able to produce other quantum effects, like moving mountains<Matthew 17:20><x.ref-MIC.com>
H4S1: Web-Sockets is an elucidated | note interval:
Hu: A sound that does not vibrate # at a note | frequency sounds like noise, and messages not encoded in the Web.Sockets-protocol can be distorted at the side of the recipient, whether server or client<Turing!> Therefore, inasmuch as the alteration of musical sounds is qtum–E, the transmission of low.latency-messages across Web-Sockets can be considered, as well. Understanding this is vital to understanding that Web-Sockets, at its core, is an encoding | paradigm, built upon, base-64 and sha-1. In fact, it is just a merged next-ded of these 2 encoding | paradigms, and such merge-deds past those # we call, a protocol.
H4S2: The encoding paradigm of Web-Sockets allow us to reduce a 2.d-note,interval into a 1.d-string:
Hu: Many of the str-pars functions<WP.MIC-H2S64> have a core function of allowing us to represent higher dimensionality with strs, which are, always, by definition, 1-d.
H3S2: A q.tum-expl of fragmentation:
<php.net>: After the socket
socket has been created using socket_create(), bound to a name with socket_bind(), and told to listen<who?> for connections with socket_listen(), this function will accept incoming connections on that socket. Once a successful | connection is made, a new Socket instance is returned, which may be used for communication.
Hu: The pronoun usage patterns, arounds sockets, indicate a pseudo-ephemeral quality, subject-less, almost like the Holy Ghost, a non-existent<#v-t> communication portal, through which data, the Spirit itself, can also transfer. In other words, the socket itself does not exist, and yet, communication is possible through a channel, if it is mutually defined. This notion also defines a protocol, which means that people who speak of it correctly, have to be esoteric. An inherent moral | quest, understanding this<Mark.4-12> escapes those who possess the speck in their eye<Matthew.7-3,5><WP.MIC-H2S75,H3S3>
H3S4: Stream as a file:
Hu: The interoperability of the filesystem functions, several of which take a stream | resource as an argument, with the stream functions, in built-in PHP, indicates that PHP tends to think of a stream, as half analogous to a file. We tend to agree #:
H4S1: Asymmetrical reading of stream files:
H5S1: A stream can be conceived of as a file, that can be mutually written, but with variable | reading permission; in a one.to-one, I can only fread what was written, by my opponent. H5S2: The file has a component of ephemerality, in that what is read, is no longer part of the file. H5S3: Like a file, both writes and reads, occur at the bottom of that file. H5S4: The file is created, with stream_socket_server, and a second editor added<Turing>!, with stream_socket_client/accept H5S5: WebSockets, as a protocol upgrade, can be conceived of as changing the file format.
H4S2: fread as a listening function:
H4S3: Streams connect var-objs:
<WP.MIC-H2S88,H3S3> A run of stream_socket/server/client/accept generates a resource | ID, and this ID, is what is connected, to the stream, and can be subsequently acted upon; these IDs, thematically, are assigned as values to objs. If the objs are the representations of what is connected, then the connection can be worked, in theory, from multiple endpoints, within the same file, and do not need to be instantiated in different | files formally, although this may be convenient, according to<WP.MIC-H2S37>
H3S5: A socket is an instance of a port:
Hu: Sockets can only be created by specifying a port<WP.MIC-H2S88>, but it’s not clear, why the resource_ID generated by stream_socket_server, and stream_socket_client are different<counter-intuitive!><bad-Rasmus><fbno>. In our initial implementation there, stream_socket_client also did not take the stream-obj, generated by socket_server, as an argument. We previously theorized sockets as endpoints, which would explain # the different IDs, but it’s not clear, the mechanism with which the endpoints can be associated with each other.<WP.MIC-H2S93>