I'm getting sick of stuff I post being completely ignored, and then when someone else posts the same thing, it gets jumped over as important information. This is the 3rd or 4th time now this has happened
I first mentioned the lack of 000/111 2 weeks ago today.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=141038&page=624&p=2482236&viewfull=1#post2482236
Believe me, pretty much everything about the purring has been noted before. If you look at the original UA thread, and the sideline audio-UA-thread, the run-length-limit and many (MANY) encoding techniques have been discussed and discounted.
I've put way more hours into the purrs than is reasonable and have come to the conclusion that the run-length-limit is intriguing and the purrs are compelling regarding information-carrying possibility, but ultimately I think it might be a dead end.
I've posited this before in the old thread - have you tried timing the period when the purrs go silent (i.e. honk and chitter when the device is "active")? Try it (especially sped up as it's significantly easier). I think you'll find that the gap is exactly the space that a multiple of purrs would fit in (depending on the length of the chittering). I believe this is because the purrs are muted/masked by the honk and chittering, but that they are still beating out their heartbeat rhythm behind the scenes. This means that we only ever hear 60-70% of the "bitstream" that comprises the purring, which, in itself, means that there isn't any data to be gleaned as the "designers" of the device would surely make sure that the data was receivable rather than having a significant portion of it blanked out.
Now, the run-length-limit itself may indicate some kind of error correction, and the good ones would easily cope with such massive data loss, but (and I've essentially said this before too) I think it's an incredible stretch to assume that FDev would make something needing a) finding an incredibly rare object, b) spending loads of time capturing an incredibly slow data stream, c) synchronising the results of the individual data captures somehow, d) using a detailed knowledge of data encoding methodology to extract information from the "data".
And (yet again, repeating myself) - the sound of the purrs being binary, and hence containing useful information, is very compelling but ultimately I think is a dead end.
EDIT: That's not to say that the purrs may not indicate SOMETHING, just that having them encode specific data which can be extracted isn't likely. The recent discovery of a system / location / circumstance where only 2 or 3 purrs was audible is interesting - did we find out if that was just for one viewer or if all participants (if more than one) were getting such a slow "beat"?
EDIT-2: And can we re-create the situation?