recall when you built your information sending device. why did we decide to send a message as a sequence of two options rather than modifying our devices to represent more options?

We chose to send messages as a sequence of two options (a “binary” system) because it makes the device simpler, more reliable, and actually more powerful for complex messages than trying to add lots of separate physical positions (like four different straw directions).

Core idea: two states, many combinations

With only two possible moves (for example: forward or backward), you can combine them in sequences to represent many different messages.

This is exactly how binary works in computers: each bit is just 0 or 1, but long sequences of 0s and 1s can represent letters, numbers, images, and much more.

• 2 options in 1 move → 2 possible messages.
• 2 options in 3 moves → 23=82^3=823=8 possible messages.
• 2 options in 10 moves → 210=10242^{10}=1024210=1024 possible messages.

So, by chaining simple two-option signals, you can handle things like “a question with 1,000 possible responses” without needing 1,000 different physical positions; you just need longer sequences.

Why not just add more options?

If we tried to physically build 4 or more distinct positions (forward, backward, left, right), several problems appear:

• Harder to distinguish : It is much easier for humans (and devices) to reliably tell apart two clear states than four similar ones, especially at a distance or under noisy conditions.

• More mechanical complexity : A 4-state device usually needs more precise construction, more careful alignment, and is easier to break or misread.

• Higher error rate : The more states you try to cram into one movement, the more often people will misinterpret the signal (Was that “left” or “slightly left”?).

In contrast, a two-state system is like a sturdy on/off switch: very clear, very robust.

Simplicity and reliability

Sending sequences of two options keeps both encoding (sending) and decoding (reading) simple.

• The sender only needs to decide: option A or option B each step.
• The receiver only needs to watch: was that A or B this time?
• Everyone can agree on a simple codebook (e.g., forward–back–back = “YES”, forward–forward–back = “NO”).

Because there are only two possibilities each time, it is easier to spot and correct mistakes: if one move looks ambiguous, you are choosing between just two candidates, not four or eight. That makes error detection and correction more practical.

Scaling to complex messages

The sequence-of-two-options idea scales very well:

• Start with a simple device (straw forward/backward).
• Agree on how many “moves” make one symbol (for example, groups of 3 or 4 bends).
• Assign each pattern to a meaning (letters, numbers, pre-defined responses).

This mirrors how real-world digital communication systems work: they use binary signals over time rather than trying to create hardware with dozens of unstable analog positions.

Mini reflection wrap‑up

So, in your information-sending device activity, you chose a sequence of two options instead of extra physical positions because:

1. It keeps the device design simple and robust.
2. It reduces confusion and transmission errors.
3. It makes encoding and decoding easier for both sides.
4. It lets you build up very complex messages from very simple building blocks, just like binary in computers.

Information gathered from public forums or data available on the internet and portrayed here.