This is a somewhat complicated question to answer. It has to do with how entropy combines when there are different types in the same source. It’s been a while, but my recollection is that the theoretical quantum entropy is about 0.95-0.97, while the chaotic entropy is extremely close to 1.0, both referred to the output bits.

To begin, know that quantum entropy and chaotic entropy are sampled simultaneously since they are both always present in the entropy source. It is not possible to separate the results of one entropy type from the other by any mathematical or other means. What is important, and perhaps a little harder to understand, is each type of entropy contributes to the lack of predictability or true randomness of the output bits. The quantum component – if it were possible to measure separately – would allow the bits to be predicted about 60% of the time, while the nominal amount is just 50% (a 50/50 chance). The chaotic entropy, by itself, would make the predictability 50% plus 7.9 x 10^-31 (that is, 50.00000000000000000000000000000079%) – immeasurably close to the nominal 50/50 chance of a perfect random number.

While the two types of entropy cannot be measured separately (without making a special design of the entropy source), if an influence, for example, a mental influence or MMI, were to affect the outcome of the measurement only through a quantum process in the entropy source, that influence would still be able to “flip” a bit to the intended state. This would be still be possible, even in the presence of the chaotic entropy in the same entropy source.

Considering more deeply, the presence of the much larger chaotic entropy, if it were not influencable by mental intention, could indeed reduce the fraction of bits (reduce the effect size) that could be changeable by mental influence by purely quantum effects.

I don’t believe that chaotic entropy, as I define it in my papers, is outside the realm of mental influence. Rather, the amount of influence or effect size is inversely related to the amount of energy it takes to flip a bit to its intended state.

For this reason, the design of MMI generators (or REGs as others may call them) can have a profound influence on the effect size in an MMI system. It just turns out that everyone (except for my MMI generators) has used designs that don’t take advantage of this relationship. Even my current generators do not take this energy relationship to its potential limit. While I have considered several designs, they are substantially more difficult to build or mass produce – at the moment. It’s an area of active effort on my part.