> Physical events are not in fact limited to occurring at clock transitions. You seem to be talking about "events". We are not talking about events. We are tal

> Physical events are not in fact limited to occurring at clock transitions. You seem to be talking about "events". We are not talking about events. We are talking about the clock component of CPU chips that keeps emitting a periodical signal. > The passage of 150ms of time is not what makes thing B clear to proceed. It absolutely does. Except that in modern chips the time interval is in nanoseconds. Two decades ago, it used to be in microseconds. Not trying to be snarky but a genuine question: Do you have any background in chip design and fab? What @kazinator and I are saying is not exactly surprising. These things are taught in undergrad or grad-level integrated circuit courses. If the circuitry didn't wait those nanoseconds before the next state change, it would be making the state change based on intermediate and possibly garbage values which would make the chip behave in a non-deterministic manner. Again, we are not talking about events or cause-and-effect. We are talking about something that is more fundamental and is baked into the design of CPU chips at the very lowest level. See also - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36476621 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36476621