Bernard, I am shocked by your failure to understand probabilities. I can now see that it is your lack of comprehension that makes you evade the question about an interfering signal blocking a sensor at the very moment that a burglar forces entry into your house.
Yes, the probability of that happening is rather like the chance of being knocked down by a pink and yellow polka dot Rolls Royce driven by a film star.
You are reluctant to say how likely that is, but it is not at all likely. The chance can be reduced still further by taking the sensible precaution of looking before starting to cross.
As you know, in the overwhelming number of households there is no interfering signal at all, so that is equivalent to crossing a road when there is no traffic on it.
In a few rare cases there might sometimes be a signal. This will overwhelmingly occur when your own system is not signalling. That is equivalent to a car driving along the road when you are not crossing it.
We have a member on this site who says he has actually tried to create an interfering signal which blocks a sensor using common devices such as you mentioned earlier, and has never managed it.
You foolishly and dishonestly started out by suggesting that a wireless system would stop working if a neighbour bought one. Now you have produced some improbable tale, which might possibly be true, about some highly unlikely combination of circumstances that might perhaps have happened once in one place.
In my old mum's house, as I said, the Entry sensor faultlessly starts the Entry coundown a thousand times a year, and the Chime multiple thousands of times a year. There are the usual car imobilisers and wireless doorbells nearby.
You have imagined a theoretical possibility, and are trying to scare people by darkly avoiding mentioning that the probability of an interfering signal blocking a sensor at the very moment a burglar forcers entry into your house, is disappearingly small.
