Hypothetically, let's say you made a script, wich turned

>>1536930
>both checking to see if anything's changed once every planck second.
That's physically impossible.

>>1536930
No such thing as exact same time in computing

>>1536931
Mostly because there's no such thing as a Planck second.

>>1536940
That but Planck time is also defined by the time it takes light to travel one Planck length in vacuum. The Planck length is the smallest length at which any event can happen (more or less).
Which means that to measure one tick of Planck time you'd need a mechanism that is smaller than one Planck length.

If you could somehow get something to switch states at every tick of Planck time (and measure it at the same time, which is impossible) then you'd just measure the inverse of your input at the next tick.

>>1536930
Put the bong down, son.

File: 1491282622058.png (17KB, 235x236px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 235x236px

>>1536930
Nothing ever happens at the same planck second. In reality, this would be a race condition with the outcome depending on the starting state and which of the two functions happens to start first.
(X, X->Y then Y->X) => X
(X, Y->X then X->Y) => Y
...

Assuming the hypothetical scenario though, if you ran each once at the /same exact time/, then I think there is only one reasonable outcome: Nothing changes.
Either (1) only one function runs and there is some change, or (2) either both functions run or neither functions run resulting in no changes. Only one function running would contradict the assumption that both run.
X->Y (Y->X) = X
Y->X (X->Y) = Y

>>1537668
It's not real

>>1536930
race condition, unpredictable unless using realtime operating system