nice post jade. Iam new to this site. But a long time lottery player. I have been waiting for some one with math skills to show how numbers can have more meaning than just random picking.

For those who think state lotterys are fixed. Think again. They are makeing around $400 million a year from there lotterys.  They take there cut out before paying off on the Big games. As for the daily 3 and 4 games. They can take pay off hits and still make millions. THEY DONT HAVE TO CHEAT. It is a money makeing operation..

  Be nice if you could dumb it down for some of us. Explain random and other forms of probabilty.

Like the boys in Vegas would say you're trying to make your point the hard way. This is so simple.

The state lotteries that use computers for their million dollar jackpots don't have disclosure. Gee I wonder why?

When the lottery commissions start giving out public information of The who? The where purchased? and what type of ticket won? i.e. Quick Pick Ticket or was it a written in slip with personal numbers I'll think otherwise.

The small 2, 5, 10. 100, 150 dollar tickets.... we don't need that information, but the big winners that get 5 of 6 numbers for 2500 dollars is a different story.

I'm from Michigan and can't help but figure Classic Lotto 47 is fixed.

When Michigan played Michigan State this year I waited until I could get a fix on the the final score of the states premier football game before filling out my lotto ticket, and believe me when I tell you this.

I had about 10 minutes to get it done before the lotto machines were going to close, for Classic 47 the machines shut down at 7:05 PM the football game was over at 6:55 PM. the final score was 35 to 21 . With my experience with Classic 47 something told me to play the final score of this game unless it was a tie.

Well if you check and see numbers 35 and 21 were 2 of the six numbers needed on that day to win the 10 million dollar prize, what I found interesting was, that there were about 20 winners that day the norm is usually 2 winners for Classic 47 that have 5 of the 6 numbers which pays 2500 dollars for second prize.

This means that either a bunch of people like myself ran out to a lottery vendor at the last minute and put the football score on their tickets or the lottery commission decided to use 35 and 21 and commit financial suicide by taking a chance of loosing the grand prize which was 10.5 million, they love their football in Michigan this was a no brainer I play Classic 47 a lot and I played 35 and 21 but only won 5 dollars I matched 3 numbers.

This is too much of a coinsedence and a familiar story for me to believe otherwise I play Classic 47 regularly and if you try and play a particular number too much for the same game it will get washed out... sort of the stock market if you put to much money in a stock purchase and buy too many shares they consider it a hostile take over and the stock will drop... they the stockmarket and the lottery people don't like that.

This all may sound like hot air but until the state lottery commisions that use computers for their big jackpots stop using random numbers and give us disclosure I wouldn't believe otherwise.

The State of Illinois is still straight up they use the ping pong balls for their little lotto game... I know we're getting an honest deal from them.

With the manipulation of the computer random number method and no disclosure required its pretty obvious we're being ripped off and it creates another industry we really don't need (those software programs like lotto buster) which probably have their lobbyists give a kick back to the politicians that run the state computer random systems.

Thank you for the feedback dougplayer and fastrak.

I'd like to redirect for a moment on the difference between this topic and a common misperception about this being a post of the lottery's sneaky way of increasing the bottom line. We know that even without some kind of number manipulation the lottery is going to make money. So, that's not the issue. Also, with number manipulation there may be some added increase to revenue. However, that would be in this case, just a side effect of the true nature of this topic. This has more to do with the lottery either knowingly or third party patsy to cover their ace knowingly manipulating selected lottery numbers based on lottery player's selected numbers. In addition, the player's selected numbers can be of any method, either previous draw based or not. If the lottery's assertion is that it's all random, then there should be no correlation between what a player selects and what the lottery selects. Furthermore, this correlation is not just a small sample that just happens to prove the opening statement. This is a long term correlation that can for the most part, at a high probability of certainty say, that what the player selects affects what the lottery selects. Therefore, the lottery's assertion that it's all random is false, because there is an establish input with an affected output. That is not random, it is manipulation and it is a crime; set aside the whole money thing.

Another test... just a test... think this will work...?

Great, it worked!!!

Ok, now that I have some time, we can talk about the difference between Classical Cartesian Points and Quantum Gaussian Points. Classical Cartesian Points are the points drawn on a graph that show the abstract concept of points. Actual points are dimensionless; they have absolutely no size at all. In order for us to visualize the abstract and invisible, a small dot of some specific size is approximately placed on a graph to show the ideal, the concept, the representation of that point. By comparison, an actual drawn point is infinitely larger than the real point. Below is an example of some points and their coordinates drawn on a graph.

If we look more closely at a point, we can see it's a circle like shape that is filled in.

This circle is just an approximation of where the point is. The actual point is still some where inside the circle. Since the monitor is only so precise and the image can only go just so far in smallness before we can't see it, the actual point can't be precisely determined. Although, this is a fairly accurate determination of where the point is. It give us some general idea where the point is.

post continues... 

Quantum Gaussian Points are slightly different, but the goal is still the same as Classical Cartesian Points. Quantum Gaussian Points work similar in that they give us a generalized concept of where the invisible, dimensionless point is. However, instead of having a ridged defined circle the Quantum Gaussian Point is more like a fuzzy dot with no apparent edge to the circle. Below show the difference between a magnified Classical Cartesian Point and a Quantum Gaussian Point.

Classical Cartesian Point	Quantum Gaussian Point

As you can see, the Classical Cartesian Point has an easy to see edge. With the Quantum Gaussian Point you can kind of tell approximately where the edge is. However, both the points have similar characteristics: each is circular, you can get a general idea of where the center is, both are visible, and they can be scaled to different radius sizes, r. The advantage that Quantum Gaussian Points have over Classical Cartesian Points is that Quantum Points have another scalable quantity that Classical Points do not. Quantum Points have a Standard Deviation value, s, that is based on the number of points in an analysis or some other statistical analysis. This will determine how the point appears in fuzziness. Below are some different Quantum Points with different s values.

Low s		Medium s		High s

A Classical Point could be though of as a Quantum Point with a s value of 0. Although, this is an over simplified explanation, the actual math is much more complicated.

post continues...

Quantum Points have the advantage of showing patterns that might not be easily seen when looking at raw Classic Points. The following animated graph shows the differences by displaying the Classic data points, then overlaying the Quantum data points and then just the Quantum data points. You can see from the animation that it's easier to see where the data tends to be more in the Quantum data point example. You can also see at certain places along the X axis the data is deficient for a period near the X axis, then returns near the X axis. From looking at the raw Classic data points, you may not have seen that so obviously.

post continues...

JadeLottery, I wish I could read that stuff you're posting.