Welcome Guest
You last visited December 10, 2016, 3:19 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# The Implications of Cracking the Code..

Topic closed. 135 replies. Last post 9 years ago by RJOh.

 Page 4 of 10
South Carolina
United States
Member #6
November 4, 2001
8790 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 4:19 pm - IP Logged

This is pretty deep stuff!

I'm from the old school. I use a pencil and paper system to help me 'guess' what the winning numbers will be. Sometimes I'm right, most times I'm wrong - usually by one number!

Here's a challenge.

Go buy one of those minature Bingo machines. Put in 10 balls numbered 0 to 9. Crank the handle a few times and then release a ball.

Restock the machine, crank it a few times and let it release a ball.

Restock the machine, crank it a few times and let it release a third ball.

Then spend money playing that particular combination.

Maybe it will match the winning combination, maybe not.

Repeat the procedure for another play combination, etc.

Now the challenge is - figure out a way to positively, in advance, identify which balls will be released.

I'm sure there are folks good at math  can quote some odds of how often the right combination will be selected, but, it's not about math. It's about accurately predicting what the next ball will be.

I doubt anyone who 'cracks the code' is going to share it here in LP. I seriously doubt if such a person exists.

It's a game where some folks win, most folks lose.  In other words - LUCK. We all have some of it some of the time, but it can't be formated, dressed up with a lot fancy words and sold for \$27.

It's about accurately predicting what the next ball will be.

I think so

It,s all right here.

Which one will it be from each position .

Position 1___0123456789
Position 2___0123456789
position 3___0123456789

MAGA

South Carolina
United States
Member #6
November 4, 2001
8790 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 4:38 pm - IP Logged

It's about accurately predicting what the next ball will be.

I think so

It,s all right here.

Which one will it be from each position .

Position 1___0123456789
Position 2___0123456789
position 3___0123456789

Do a serious study on how straight position falls to aid you in selecting.

This is the odd pr combos.

I use position one as a guide.
What digit dominates in position one here.

The odd digit.

then an even digit will sneak in here and there.
So when I have 1 even 2 odd or all odd combo I give consideration on position one .

Study your 1,000 straights and you will figure it out.

Helps lower your odds if anything.

South Carolina
odd pairs
November 15,2007[ Evening ]        7 7 5
November 13,2007[ Midday ]          1 2 9
November 12,2007[ Midday ]         7 1 6
November 9,2007 [ Evening ]         9 5 3
November 9,2007 [ Midday ]           9 7 3
November 8,2007 [ Evening ]          4 7 3
November 8,2007 [ Midday ]           7 1 5
November 6,2007 [ Midday ]           5 8 5
November 5,2007 [ Evening ]          7-7-7
Sat, Nov  3, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3         0-9-5
Fri, Nov  2, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3          7-2-1
Fri, Nov  2, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3     9-5-0
Wed, Oct 31, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3      6-3-7
Wed, Oct 31, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3 9-3-4
Wed, Oct 30, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3      5-3-5
Thu, Oct 25, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3       2-7-1
Thu, Oct 25, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3   7-7-8
Wed, Oct 24, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3      6-1-7
Wed, Oct 24, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3 5-1-4
Mon, Oct 22, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3       2-3-3
Sat, Oct 20, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3        0-7-5
Fri, Oct 19, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3     1-4-1
Thu, Oct 18, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3        3-1-1
Thu, Oct 18, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3   3-3-2
Wed, Oct 17, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3      5-7-6
Tue, Oct 16, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3        3-7-5
Tue, Oct 16, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3    7-1-9
Mon, Oct 15, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3        7-5-0
Sun, Oct 14, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3        8-9-3
Fri, Oct 12, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3           9-1-9
Fri, Oct 12, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3      1-1-6
Thu, Oct 11, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3    1-9-1
Wed, Oct 10, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3        9-7-3
Wed, Oct 10, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3   5-5-6
Tue, Oct 9, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3       9-8-9
Mon, Oct 8, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3      9-6-9
Thu, Oct 4, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3       7-4-5
Wed, Oct 3, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3          3-3-5
Mon, Oct 1, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3           1-2-9
Mon, Oct 1, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3      7-1-6
Fri, Sep 28, 2007 South Carolina Midday 3      5-5-4
Thu, Sep 27, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3         5-4-1
Tue, Sep 25, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3         1-9-8
Sat, Sep 22, 2007 South Carolina Pick 3          7-3-1

MAGA

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19831 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 4:53 pm - IP Logged

It's about accurately predicting what the next ball will be.

I think so

It,s all right here.

Which one will it be from each position .

Position 1___0123456789
Position 2___0123456789
position 3___0123456789

When you're playing Pick5 and jackpot games with 5 or 6 positions and a choice of 35 or more numbers per each positions, the above chart makes predicting pick3 winners look a lot easier.  You can only be wrong 9x9x9 time but being right about one or two positions doesn't count in most forms of the game.  With the pick5 and jackpot games, being right about 2 or 3 positions will win your dollar back and sometimes more.

* you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket *

Wandering Aimlessly
United States
Member #25360
November 5, 2005
4461 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 5:06 pm - IP Logged

pumpi76 I thoroughly enjoy reading your posts. However, your assumption here is  that BAD PEOPLE will be the first ones to determine THE HOLY GRAIL of the lottery system. I look at it in another way. I am praying that someone good will be the first one to crack the nut or to nail it. I am not good! There has only been one person that was good!  But, when I win, I give 5% of my winnings to the person that sold me the ticket, and purchase a money order that is 10% of the winnings. Last week I had two quick pick winners - one for \$400(Pick 4), and the other for \$250(Pick 3). I have two money orders(\$40 and \$25) that will be given to either Compassion International, The Christian Children's Fund, The Salvation Army, or The Smile Train. All of these organizations help people profoundly!! I have to believe there are many more - perhaps thousands who do the same with their winnings. There is a Holy Grail out there just waiting to be discovered. However, I believe our creator reveals thoughts and ideas to those who love and trust him and his son. Some of the profound ideas you and tntea have did not come from yourself, and you know it. If I am ever fortunate enough to even get close, MUM is the word. However, I would PM helpful people like yourself on what to play now and then. My pm would read, "pumpi76, go all in for a \$30 COMBO on 245 for MON MID NOV 19, 2007 and God Bless You". Soooooooohhh, why don't we pray that THE HOLY GRAIL will revealed to someone who will do good with the winnings, and not assume that terrorists will get hold of it.

Well you can cross the Salvation Army off your list.  They won't accept money won from playing the lottery.  The Salvation Army counsels people with addictions, one of them being gambling and, yes, some people spend their paychecks hoping for a lottery win. So they feel that it would be hypocritical to accept a donation.  Here's an example of a man who sent them \$100,000 and his check was returned.   http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20030102/ai_n9615603

Regarding good people winning the lottery, I don't think God works that way, but this isn't a religious board, it's a lottery forum, so I won't start preaching my beliefs. After all, Bunky Bartlett said he prayed to his many Wicca gods and got the sign from a tarot card or some such premonition.  When reading posts on LP and different sites about praying to find the secret numbers, the perfect job, etc., I often think of Danny Thomas who prayed to Saint Jude.  According to Mr. Thomas, he asked for guidance in his life. "Show me my way in life and I will build you a shrine."  He didn't say "send me a million dollar contract," he just asked for direction. For some of us, maybe winning money isn't what God has planned.  My fraternal grandfather use to say "Man makes plans, God laughs."

Regarding where science comes from, Albert Einstein said "Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind."

Yes, I do have an original thought once in a while,  but why struggle with words when someone wiser than I already said it?

South Carolina
United States
Member #6
November 4, 2001
8790 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 5:30 pm - IP Logged

When you're playing Pick5 and jackpot games with 5 or 6 positions and a choice of 35 or more numbers per each positions, the above chart makes predicting pick3 winners look a lot easier.  You can only be wrong 9x9x9 time but being right about one or two positions doesn't count in most forms of the game.  With the pick5 and jackpot games, being right about 2 or 3 positions will win your dollar back and sometimes more.

You are correct that is does not count in most forms of the game .

But for two of three correct you can back up your three digit bet with an exact pair wgaer in many states.

50 to 1 I believe it is.

I would love to have exact pair wagers in S.C.

Look at my signature. I have the 532 there which I played mid-day today.
632 came out. That is x32 exact.

And I only played three numbers on todays mid. And I was on the serious lookout for the X32 but did not cover all position one and lost.

MAGA

McKinney/Texas
United States
Member #47363
November 1, 2006
706 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 5:50 pm - IP Logged

I have NEVER had The Salvation Army return any of my checks, money orders, or cash contributions.

Ephesians 3:20

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7322 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 6:21 pm - IP Logged

The lotteries asked people like Green and Hawking to find the best method where their drawings would be the most random. "

Is that ego crap i can't stand...that you believe there are smart people out there like Brian Green and Stephen Hawkins...There aren't people out there like Brian Green and Stephen Hawkings...Both of them are the number 1 and number 2 SMARTEST PERSONS IN THE WORLD...There aren't geniuses like Brian Green and Stephen Hawkings in the world!!!...Just because someone is the smartest person in a state or a country that doesn't make him the smartest person in the world..There are still thousands of geniuses like him...But Brian Green and stephen Hawkings are the 2 smartest people in the world...There aren't people like that in the world...(and there is a difference between the 2 smartest people in the world versus the smartes people that have touched this world...

"Well there are people like that in the world, just that they don't specialize on Pick3..."

I did not write that...I am sick and tire of coming to LP and finding stuff i did not write..I know what i wrote...And if i ever did even though i don't see how i could have written that, i take it back...There aren't people like that in the world..

Something i don't understand...If you don't believe that the code can be crack then ask yourself the question..."Why are you here" Why are you at LP?is not because you believe that one day you will hit it...All i get is pessimism...No offense to anyone but i sometimes get the impression that some of you are here at LP just because you enjoy commenting and not because you share the spirit of one day finding that Holy Grail..You don't believe there is such a Code to be cracked but yet you are here at LP...Is like a Christian going to church (church represents LP) but saying that he/she doesn't believe in Christ...I don't get it..The same thing happened when i wrote that i believe a supercomputer could crack pick3..And instead of been optimist all i got is "no way"..What i got is a believe in people's own superiority of brain power when a supercomputer can calculate such much trillion of informations per second something a human can't...It may not be able to rationalize like humans but you don't need to rationalize to crack pick3...

Pumpi,

If this discussion was about theoretical physics, quantum geometry, the Big Bang, or the affects a blackhole has on the surrounding matter, Bryan Green and Stephen Hawking's opinions would be very important. But other than hearing the lottery described as a blackhole that pulls the money out of our pockets, I don't see how we could use their genius to crack a code that you can't identify.

One of the arguments against RNG drawings is that we can't see the mechanics that creates the chaos producing random numbers with ball drawings and the possibility the computer could be programmed to eliminate the combinations with the most wagers. Even if somebody programmed the computer so a certain combination would be drawn on a certain day to wager on it, how could we find it?

"Well there are people like that in the world, just that they don't specialize on Pick3..."

Pumpi: "I did not write that..."

I copied and pasted that from your post and assumed you meant there are many geniuses; they just don't play pick-3 games. Green and Hawking's area of expertise is a perfect Universe where mathematics can be used. This would be impossible if the planets, stars, and galaxies were bumping into each other like in a chaotic ball drawing. I'm pretty sure Green and Hawking would agree with me that you can't predict the outcome of chaotic situations.

"Something i don't understand...If you don't believe that the code can be crack then ask yourself the question..."Why are you here"

If I encoded this message by scrambling the letters, somebody could crack my code and clearly read it, but that's because there is a code. I've watched hundreds of live ball drawings and determined there is no code to crack.

Maybe by using the word "code" you mean a system that could consistently predict the outcome of pick-3 games and is profitable. If that's true, this discussion about the implications would have gone in a different direction.

"No offense to anyone but i sometimes get the impression that some of you are here at LP just because you enjoy commenting and not because you share the spirit of one day finding that Holy Grail.."

Green and Hawking could explain the mathematics they use to determine the Universe is expanding and how they used that data to determine the Universe is 13 1/2 billion years old. I could explain how I played and hit using my license plate number in the second Ohio Pick-3 drawing over 25 years ago. But I can't tell you why that combination hit so I doubt that information will help you finding the "Holy Grail".

I'm not taking any offense but I don't expect nor would I suggest that the other LP members only post the things that could help me win the lottery. I've found when I have asked questions LP members have gladly shared their ideas either on the thread or by private messages.

"I don't get it..The same thing happened when i wrote that i believe a supercomputer could crack pick3..And instead of been optimist all i got is "no way".."

That's probably because you're suggesting we need a multi-million dollar machine to play a game where house edge is 50% and the top payoff is \$500. Predicting pick-3 numbers is not the problem; overcoming the house edge and getting a reasonable profit is.

Pick-3 profits are the amount waged minus the amount won. When you win \$500 the money comes from the losses of other players. If all the players played the same number everyday and won, where would the money for payoffs come from?

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7322 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2007, 8:26 pm - IP Logged

This is pretty deep stuff!

I'm from the old school. I use a pencil and paper system to help me 'guess' what the winning numbers will be. Sometimes I'm right, most times I'm wrong - usually by one number!

Here's a challenge.

Go buy one of those minature Bingo machines. Put in 10 balls numbered 0 to 9. Crank the handle a few times and then release a ball.

Restock the machine, crank it a few times and let it release a ball.

Restock the machine, crank it a few times and let it release a third ball.

Then spend money playing that particular combination.

Maybe it will match the winning combination, maybe not.

Repeat the procedure for another play combination, etc.

Now the challenge is - figure out a way to positively, in advance, identify which balls will be released.

I'm sure there are folks good at math  can quote some odds of how often the right combination will be selected, but, it's not about math. It's about accurately predicting what the next ball will be.

I doubt anyone who 'cracks the code' is going to share it here in LP. I seriously doubt if such a person exists.

It's a game where some folks win, most folks lose.  In other words - LUCK. We all have some of it some of the time, but it can't be formated, dressed up with a lot fancy words and sold for \$27.

"Now the challenge is - figure out a way to positively, in advance, identify which balls will be released."

I wrote the digits 0 - 9 on slips of paper, mixed them up, and drew them one at time out of my ball cap. The first line was the first 3 digits, the second line was 2nd, 3rd, and 4th digits, I continued through the ninth line where I used the 9th, 10th, and 1st digit and 10th, 1st, and 2nd on the tenth line. Since I had each digit in the 1st position, which gave me a 1 in 100 chance of winning, I decided to play the 10 combinations as 50 cents straight.

"In other words - LUCK."

That's exactly what I thought when the 7th line (182) was drawn that night. I tried it again the next night (for \$1 straight) but a double was drawn, another double the night after that, two no hits, and then two more doubles. It was then that I realized I had a 1 in 100 chance of hitting a straight number in about 72% of the draws.

"In other words - LUCK. We all have some of it some of the time, but it can't be formated, dressed up with a lot fancy words and sold for \$27."

Whoops, it looks like I just gave away a \$27 system for free.

Wandering Aimlessly
United States
Member #25360
November 5, 2005
4461 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 20, 2007, 1:21 am - IP Logged

I have NEVER had The Salvation Army return any of my checks, money orders, or cash contributions.

But did you tell them your money was from winning the lottery?  I only mentioned it because it was in all the local papers here 4 years ago when this man won Lotto and his donation was returned. That's how I just found the article online ..I remembered his name.  No big deal - just mentioned it & posted the link FYI.   I suppose a lot of people donate money after winning a contest, a lottery game, and so on, but most religious organizations would never know. Perhaps this was a local decision.  I doubt if there would have been any questions at all had the money been claimed anonymously.  Otherwise, how would they know?  I'm sure whatever you give is from the heart, which is what really matters.

LAS VEGAS
United States
Member #47729
November 22, 2006
4507 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 20, 2007, 3:22 am - IP Logged

If one were to find the holy grail his/her life would not be worth a dime.

People are being murdered over parking spaces in this country.  (I just watched an eposode of Court TV).  What do you think some of the lower forms of life waking on two legs would do to get the secret away from you?  Paying you would be their last option.  I hate to think what the first option would be.

If you find yourself holding "the secret" I strongly suggest you keep as low a profile as you can.  If you suspect word is getting out that someone has a sure  fire way to win at Lotto, you might find yourself the target of some unsavory people.

My advice to such a fortunate person would be to 1) keep your mouth shut, don't tell anyone, not even your spouse and 2) don't get greedy and maximize your profits as qickly as you can thus drawing attention to yourself.

This is just my narrow-minded, humble, arrogant, insipid, yet extremely sagacious opinion.

Is this why we haven't heard anything further about Ms. Cho & Yew Woba (Woba Sisters) who reportedly confirmed bank accounts by playing their LB posted holy grail of winning secret 3 picks ???

EddessaKnight

Zeta Reticuli Star System
United States
Member #30470
January 17, 2006
10354 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 20, 2007, 2:26 pm - IP Logged

As for "Cracking the code" these games existed in one form of another before personal computers, heck, even before calculators. They've withstood everything they've ever been up against (except that team play effort in the Virginia lottery, which can no longer be done.)

(Before state lotteries the pick 3 started in the ghettos and was called "policy" and it was a 5 cent bet. Then "the Outfit" got involved, it became "The Number" or "Numbers" and was (and is) \$1.

When I see a state, any state, not offer their pick 3 game anymore because it isn't making money, I might start to believe someone somewhere has 'cracked the code'.

Until then, it's "Once upon a time", like all fairy tales.

"Tipsters and gypsters" make a lot of money convincing others thay have cracked the code but they're "selling the sizzle and not the steak." Their mopney doesn't co,e from playing and winning but from convincing others it's possible.

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

LAS VEGAS
United States
Member #47729
November 22, 2006
4507 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 20, 2007, 4:35 pm - IP Logged

The lotteries asked people like Green and Hawking to find the best method where their drawings would be the most random. "

Is that ego crap i can't stand...that you believe there are smart people out there like Brian Green and Stephen Hawkins...There aren't people out there like Brian Green and Stephen Hawkings...Both of them are the number 1 and number 2 SMARTEST PERSONS IN THE WORLD...There aren't geniuses like Brian Green and Stephen Hawkings in the world!!!...Just because someone is the smartest person in a state or a country that doesn't make him the smartest person in the world..There are still thousands of geniuses like him...But Brian Green and stephen Hawkings are the 2 smartest people in the world...There aren't people like that in the world...(and there is a difference between the 2 smartest people in the world versus the smartes people that have touched this world...

"Well there are people like that in the world, just that they don't specialize on Pick3..."

I did not write that...I am sick and tire of coming to LP and finding stuff i did not write..I know what i wrote...And if i ever did even though i don't see how i could have written that, i take it back...There aren't people like that in the world..

Something i don't understand...If you don't believe that the code can be crack then ask yourself the question..."Why are you here" Why are you at LP?is not because you believe that one day you will hit it...All i get is pessimism...No offense to anyone but i sometimes get the impression that some of you are here at LP just because you enjoy commenting and not because you share the spirit of one day finding that Holy Grail..You don't believe there is such a Code to be cracked but yet you are here at LP...Is like a Christian going to church (church represents LP) but saying that he/she doesn't believe in Christ...I don't get it..The same thing happened when i wrote that i believe a supercomputer could crack pick3..And instead of been optimist all i got is "no way"..What i got is a believe in people's own superiority of brain power when a supercomputer can calculate such much trillion of informations per second something a human can't...It may not be able to rationalize like humans but you don't need to rationalize to crack pick3...

Pumpi, et al-

WILL THE LOTTERY BE NEXT ???

 Quote: ...has come up with what may be the Grand Unified Theory. That's the "holy grail" of physics that scientists have been searching for ever since Albert Einstein presented his General Theory of Relativity nearly 100 years ago. Even more remarkable is that Lisi, who has a Ph.D. but no permanent university affiliation, solves the problem without resorting to exotic dimensions, string theory or exceptionally complex mathematics"EddessaKnight

# SciTech

Laid-Back Surfer Dude May Be Next Einstein

Friday, November 16, 2007

A. Garrett Lisi

A surfer dude with no fixed address may be this century's Einstein.

A. Garrett Lisi, a physicist who divides his time between surfing in Maui and teaching snowboarding in Lake Tahoe, has come up with what may be the Grand Unified Theory.

That's the "holy grail" of physics that scientists have been searching for ever since Albert Einstein presented his General Theory of Relativity nearly 100 years ago.

Even more remarkable is that Lisi, who has a Ph.D. but no permanent university affiliation, solves the problem without resorting to exotic dimensions, string theory or exceptionally complex mathematics.

• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.

A successful Grand Unified Theory would use a series of equations to show how the four fundamental forces of nature — gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces — relate to each other.

Electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force, which controls radioactivity, were linked more than 30 years ago, and some progress has been made with linking them to the strong nuclear force, which binds protons together in the atomic nucleus.

# But gravity has always been an outlier. Not only have all attempts to link gravity to the other three forces failed, but physicists still can't agree on what gravity actually is or how it works.

Lisi solves this by using the E8 lattice, an eight-dimensional structure visualized earlier this year in a widely circulated paper.

He noticed that several of the equations used to describe the lattice matched those he'd come up with trying to resolve the four fundamental forces.

"The moment this happened my brain exploded with the implications and the beauty of the thing," Lisi tells New Scientist magazine. "I thought: 'Holy crap, that's it!'"

• Click here to read a formal presentation of the theory, if you dare.

By mapping known subatomic particles, plus 20 imaginary ones, onto the 248 points of the E8 lattice, and then rotating the lattice in a computer model, Lisi shows how the particles elegantly combine to form three of the four forces.

The imaginary ones combine to form gravity, for which subatomic particles have only been theorized.

• Click here to watch a video of the lattice being rotated.

"Some incredibly beautiful stuff falls out of Lisi's theory," David Ritz Finkelstein of Georgia Tech tells New Scientist. "I think that this must be more than coincidence and he really is touching on something profound."

But Professor Marcus du Sautoy of Oxford tells Britain's Daily Telegraph that "there seem to be a lot of things still to fill in."

For his part, Lisi self-mockingly calls his finding "An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything," and downplays the suggestion that it may be the Grand Unified Theory.

"The theory is very young, and still in development," he tells the Daily Telegraph. "Right now, I'd assign a low (but not tiny) likelihood to this prediction."

He hopes the Large Hadron Collider, or LHC, currently being built on the Swiss-French border will find some of his 20 imaginary gravity-related particles.

"This is an all-or-nothing kind of theory — it's either going to be exactly right, or spectacularly wrong," Lisi tells New Scientist. "I'm the first to admit this is a long shot. But it ain't over till the LHC sings."

• Click here for the New Scientist story, and here for the Daily Telegraph version.

Honduras
Member #20982
August 29, 2005
4715 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 20, 2007, 5:02 pm - IP Logged

Pumpi, et al-

WILL THE LOTTERY BE NEXT ???

 Quote: ...has come up with what may be the Grand Unified Theory. That's the "holy grail" of physics that scientists have been searching for ever since Albert Einstein presented his General Theory of Relativity nearly 100 years ago. Even more remarkable is that Lisi, who has a Ph.D. but no permanent university affiliation, solves the problem without resorting to exotic dimensions, string theory or exceptionally complex mathematics"EddessaKnight

# SciTech

Laid-Back Surfer Dude May Be Next Einstein

Friday, November 16, 2007

A. Garrett Lisi

A surfer dude with no fixed address may be this century's Einstein.

A. Garrett Lisi, a physicist who divides his time between surfing in Maui and teaching snowboarding in Lake Tahoe, has come up with what may be the Grand Unified Theory.

That's the "holy grail" of physics that scientists have been searching for ever since Albert Einstein presented his General Theory of Relativity nearly 100 years ago.

Even more remarkable is that Lisi, who has a Ph.D. but no permanent university affiliation, solves the problem without resorting to exotic dimensions, string theory or exceptionally complex mathematics.

• Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Natural Science Center.

A successful Grand Unified Theory would use a series of equations to show how the four fundamental forces of nature — gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces — relate to each other.

Electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force, which controls radioactivity, were linked more than 30 years ago, and some progress has been made with linking them to the strong nuclear force, which binds protons together in the atomic nucleus.

# But gravity has always been an outlier. Not only have all attempts to link gravity to the other three forces failed, but physicists still can't agree on what gravity actually is or how it works.

Lisi solves this by using the E8 lattice, an eight-dimensional structure visualized earlier this year in a widely circulated paper.

He noticed that several of the equations used to describe the lattice matched those he'd come up with trying to resolve the four fundamental forces.

"The moment this happened my brain exploded with the implications and the beauty of the thing," Lisi tells New Scientist magazine. "I thought: 'Holy crap, that's it!'"

• Click here to read a formal presentation of the theory, if you dare.

By mapping known subatomic particles, plus 20 imaginary ones, onto the 248 points of the E8 lattice, and then rotating the lattice in a computer model, Lisi shows how the particles elegantly combine to form three of the four forces.

The imaginary ones combine to form gravity, for which subatomic particles have only been theorized.

• Click here to watch a video of the lattice being rotated.

"Some incredibly beautiful stuff falls out of Lisi's theory," David Ritz Finkelstein of Georgia Tech tells New Scientist. "I think that this must be more than coincidence and he really is touching on something profound."

But Professor Marcus du Sautoy of Oxford tells Britain's Daily Telegraph that "there seem to be a lot of things still to fill in."

For his part, Lisi self-mockingly calls his finding "An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything," and downplays the suggestion that it may be the Grand Unified Theory.

"The theory is very young, and still in development," he tells the Daily Telegraph. "Right now, I'd assign a low (but not tiny) likelihood to this prediction."

He hopes the Large Hadron Collider, or LHC, currently being built on the Swiss-French border will find some of his 20 imaginary gravity-related particles.

"This is an all-or-nothing kind of theory — it's either going to be exactly right, or spectacularly wrong," Lisi tells New Scientist. "I'm the first to admit this is a long shot. But it ain't over till the LHC sings."

• Click here for the New Scientist story, and here for the Daily Telegraph version.

Well the same thing they said about Brian Green...I remember reading an article like 9 years ago with the same titled about Brian Green and around those lines " (Some dude) might be the next Einstein"....I also read an article that said "Some dude might be the Smartest Person Ever" (notice the difference) again talking about Brian Green...LOL..

And that's just talk, i don't think no one with a skate board will ever solve the Unified Grand Theory" not now not ever...And just because you solve the "Grand Unifed Theory" doesn't make you as smart as Einstein...That kid may have stumbled upon something but that doesn't make him the smartest person in the world...LOL....He could get all the publicity in the world, to me he will not be the smartest person in the world...

South Carolina
United States
Member #6
November 4, 2001
8790 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 20, 2007, 5:14 pm - IP Logged

Well the same thing they said about Brian Green...I remember reading an article like 9 years ago with the same titled about Brian Green and around those lines " (Some dude) might be the next Einstein"....I also read an article that said "Some dude might be the Smartest Person Ever" (notice the difference) again talking about Brian Green...LOL..

And that's just talk, i don't think no one with a skate board will ever solve the Unified Grand Theory" not now not ever...And just because you solve the "Grand Unifed Theory" doesn't make you as smart as Einstein...That kid may have stumbled upon something but that doesn't make him the smartest person in the world...LOL....He could get all the publicity in the world, to me he will not be the smartest person in the world...

There is no smartest person in the world.

Never will be.

What one person knows another person does not know.

We all have our own individual knowledge.

You know what I may not know and I know what you may not know.

MAGA

Blundering Time Traveler

United States
Member #28945
December 25, 2005
1528 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 20, 2007, 8:07 pm - IP Logged

There is no smartest person in the world.

Never will be.

What one person knows another person does not know.

We all have our own individual knowledge.

You know what I may not know and I know what you may not know.

I agree JAP69.

As we know, Intelligence is not book learning or the ability to regurgitate the ideas that are read. There are different parts to intelligence such as  physical, mental, emotional, kinesthetic and spiritual which fuse together into creative expression. Some of us are well developed in some areas, and stunted in others. ALL of those elements serve to  make for a very integrated human being. To the degree that you are stunted in any one area defines the limits of your Intelligence. When you are better integrated your Intelligence will know no bounds. And truly that intelligence is Creativity. Its the innate ability to creatively express yourself using the totality of yourself.

That's why that physicist surfer-dude was able to come up with his theory. His creativity. Of course the book learning helped to contextualize his scientific pursuit, but the book learning is an asset and not a necessity. Einstein, Tesla, Buckminister Fuller were also infinitely creative. If we mine that within ourselves we will reap more treasures. That creativity is uniquely your own. Your own way of looking at the world, and more importantly, that creative awareness is the interface that you use to dialogue with the energy around you. Who knows from where a creative impulse or idea comes - from within or from the outside? Both.

If you believe:

1. That an idea is literally energy

2. You at root are literally energy personified

3. Energy is literally a field of information and therefore has memory

4. Energy is creatively intelligent and its all around you

Then why can't your creative awareness, which is also energy, interface or dialogue with the energy that is all around you which contains the energy of what's going to be drawn in the upcoming lotto drawing. Well...It can, But we often miss it. Our environment behaves like a feedback loop and can send us the info through a license plate, or scrying, or a dream, RNG, computer program or even just sitting at the table and working out a formula. It all works. We just don't often have the awareness of certain streams of info and even if we do, we don't have the "vocabulary" or "language" to consciously and accurately interpret that field of information. Thankfully this field of info, unbeknownst to us, seeps through and feeds us anyway contributing to our creative insights. Haven't you often wondered, "hmm...where did that come from?"

So In a word, or forgive me as evidenced - many words,  outside of direct inference or intuiting, which is 100% accurate, I still do believe there are winning systems or formulas for all the lotto games that can  help you win at least, dare I say, 90% percent of the time with a very small pool of numbers. I don't have it...yet. Or rather, I don't see it yet. I think one always finds what one seeks. Whether you have the clarity to realize that you actually have it is another matter. But trying to connect the dots has been challenging, humbling and fun.

Happy Explorations...

 Page 4 of 10