Back on 2007-10-28 @ 15:39 ET, I posted a modified graph that was presented at the beginning of a Lottery Post News story; the News post was Tenn. players picked up on new odds before lottery revealed glitch. In it I had shown a possible trigger date of Aug 6; since then I have decided on the date of Aug 8. The following graph is from that Lottery Post News story and will be necessary for part of the theories I'll write about next.
One of the theories I have been thinking about was the possibility that a flaw might be present in the computer picking process. I have abandoned that as a possible reason. It's because if there were a flaw, it would have been present at the beginning of the drawing process not at some point into the process. A flaw of this kind would have been a flaw in logic or in the computer hardware itself. I don't think the computer reprogrammed itself to produce a logic error and if the hardware is flawed, then we'd see the continuing flawed lottery selections showing up even after they fixed the glitch.
I'm left with two other possible theories, one more disturbing than the other. The obvious first theory is the computer was rigged to go off at a pre-described date of 2007-08-08. It's possible someone either within the state lottery organization rigged the computer or someone within the computer supplier's organization rigged the computer. Flaws in logic and hardware don't usually lend themselves to happenstance, usually it has a helping hand and usually it's a human one at that. Also, looking at the graph above, why did the Cash 4 percentage have a nearly straight climb up at about the Aug 8 time frame? As you can see for the Cash 4, it's a mostly upward slant after Aug 8. This upward trend coincides with the suspected anomalies' trigger date of Aug 8. It's almost as if some knew when that date would be. Now, I can see some of the Self Picking Lottery diehards picking up on this, but as a percentage of the Self Picking population who might and even smaller portion of the total Playing population, I don't see how that could account for the straight climb up in percentage of singles played. Also, notice the decline in percentage begins BEFORE the announcement of the glitch on Aug 21. Almost like someone on the inside knew ahead of time what was going to happen and then notified their cohorts in crime. On Aug 20 there was an immediate drop off, then came the announcement on Aug 21.
The other possible theory is more dark and sinister. It still implicates the possible involvement of either the lottery organization and/or the lottery supplier personnel. The theory is that computer generated number systems are designed to produce the lesser number of winning number combinations to maximize the profit that state lotteries need. In this case, we'd need anyone who played the lottery during that time frame for the Tennessee Lottery Cash 4 and Cash 3 to sound in on their winnings and loses. We'd also need the time frame when you noticed there was a problem and did you try to capitalized on it and when did you start. Did your winnings increase, stay the same or decrease during that period of Jul 27 to Aug 19? Were you consistent in your playing? Did you use past lottery results to derive your picks? These are very important questions because their answers have a serious implication into the proving or disproving of this theory.
The intricate workings of this are complex but not beyond comprehension. The understanding of this last theory is multifaceted but bear with me. Because of someone's mistake within the Tennessee Lottery, we may have the proof we need to expose the truth about these computer generated numbers. When that person used the 'u' code instead of the 'r' code, it gave us the advantage of narrowing the field of playable numbers. That narrowed field of numbers basically made it more difficult for the computer to randomly hide its devious act. It began showing up as anomalies in the picking process. Mostly likely the result of players picking up on the new picking structure that was inadvertently imposed by the 'u' code. As players began playing more singles, the computer began trying to figure out where to pick but only had a more narrow choice of playable numbers to follow. Trying to do what it was programmed to do, it was forced to choose numbers that would ultimately start producing the anomalies. These anomalies, are anomalies, because of the laws that must be followed by Quantum Lottery Mechanics were not; the rules it would have followed for a truly random selection were essentially violated.
When that person put the 'u' code in, there was for a small draw period when the numbers were truly random. It was at the beginning on 2007-07-28 for draw index 1 to draw index 20. However, seemingly out of nowhere, on 2007-08-08 at draw index 21, the laws of Quantum Lottery Mechanics seemed to just fall apart. Maybe if the correct code was placed in the computer we might not even be discussing this as a topic, but that person did. Fortunately for us, that person did... Thank you.
What to learn, document people. I can't stress that enough, document, document, document. Keep as extensive a record as you can of your playing and posting of numbers; keep track of your winning and losing. There are more instruments for detecting randomness than what was presented here and the list is growing thanks to the new field of possibility, Quantum Lottery Mechanics. I hope many of you reply, if not here, anywhere within the Lottery Post and most importantly with YOUR government officials. Don't take the kind of ridiculous number scheme they are trying to pull off on us, help by documenting and prove the truth.