Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 22, 2017, 11:19 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Fooled by Randomness

Topic closed. 297 replies. Last post 6 years ago by jimmy4164.

Page 20 of 20
42
PrintE-mailLink
CARBOB's avatar - FL LOTTERY_LOGO.png
ORLANDO, FLORIDA
United States
Member #4924
June 3, 2004
5980 Posts
Offline
Posted: September 28, 2010, 8:11 am - IP Logged

What do you think now, still noise, over 25% hit rate ?

 

 


    United States
    Member #93947
    July 10, 2010
    2180 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: September 28, 2010, 2:07 pm - IP Logged

    CARBOB,

    "What do you think now, still noise, over 25% hit rate ?"

    (Did you read this?)
    http://ms.about.com/od/glossary/g/significance.htm

    The next time you watch three [0...9] lottery ball machines on TV, ask yourself,
    "How do these machines know what the trend is and whether to continue it if they do?"

    If, after reading the About.com definition and reflecting on the ball machines, you still believe you have discovered some predictable pattern or trend, you are free to do so.  In fact, you should probably be out buying as many Pick-3 tickets as you can afford.  However, I have no interest in continuing a conversation that will resolve nothing.  I have posted many Pick-3 results and analyses that I believe show the drawings are sufficiently random to serve as a basis for awarding prizes.  If you disagree, that's fine.

    --Jimmy4164

      Kola's avatar - image
      Blundering Time Traveler

      United States
      Member #28945
      December 25, 2005
      1532 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: September 30, 2010, 11:29 am - IP Logged
      Hello Jimmy4164,
       
      Great thread.
      I enjoy and agree with many of Mr. Taleb ideas. But nowhere does he give an example of random occurrences  The examples he gives just prove that oftentimes the herd may get it wrong, but there is always a handful that see perturbations, or patterns no one else sees or sees as well. Mr. Taleb was able to see it, and so were a few others.
       
      There are always patterns Jimmy. When you look at the natural universe, Nature - the Patternmaster(term borrowed form the late-great author Octavia Butler - Brilliant) - is prolific with its cyclical musings. We are slave to these cycles, these patterns too. For example: Bio-rhythms entrained by the Patternmaster through millennia through ancestral DNA and then to you and me. You know that.  The problem is in being able to at first see these patterns, decipher them, and then give them a language. We're just trying to codify observable phenomenon Jimmy.
       
      Mr. Taleb also said that most of the economics metrics, models and theory used to analyze the economy, could not be used to predict the Black Swan drama. But a few did. He argues that these tools actually helped to further blind the actors in the drama  Don't you think that all those tools or rather stats you have pulled to prove the fallibility of systems in the lottery may sometimes be a little blind, and too linear sometimes to hone in on the human mind's creatively dynamic and unmatched ability to see and oftentimes intuit observable phenomenon, and then give it a code like E=mc2 for example? 
       
      You think patterns don't exist in the lottery, because all you may see are balls. On these balls are numbers: 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. The Number 2 has a different quality than the number 5. Isn't that true? And the number 3 even different still. They each have a different vibration, different energy signature.  Put them together as in the number 253, and you have something different altogether. Isn't $2, $3, or $5 different in meaning, and quality than $253. Or if your musically inclined the 2, 3 and 5 notes do not have the same quality sound, frequency or vibration that the 253 note has.
       
      You posit the suggestion that if for example 253 were drawn, there is no way that it would know that 111 was dropped they day before, because balls or numbers are not conscious, So hence its dropping on any particular day is random. Is this correct?
      Don't be fooled by the numbered balls in some plastic tube. They are not inert. Are you aware of the experiment with simple electrons that proved that two electrons were of aware of each other. Don't want to go into it, but if the two electron in that experiment were aware, a bunch of electrons in the form of numbered balls are aware on some level. So just as every sentient being has a level of awareness, we can say that particles like numbered balls also have a level of awareness.  Again, not my opinion. Fact.
       
      Apart from entropy, human events or rather any-sentient-being event can even have a measurable impact on machines like Random Number and Random Event Generators. Check out the experiment with the live baby rabbits and their literally Robotic Mother and how the Mother Robot repeatedly defied its random programming through test after test by drawing nearer to the rabbits way more than the statistical average would dictate than when the rabbits were not there. The book The Field will give you, among other things, the science behind these kinds of experiments. 
      Also Check out:
      1. A Beginner's Guide to Constructing the Universe- Michael S. Schneider (great book- all about numbers and much more)
      2.The Holographic Universe- Michael Talbot
      3.The Field - Lynne McTaggart
      4. Anything by Amit Goswami
       
      When you look around don't you see how Nature uses numbers or rather math to create. It uses the same patterns and same math over and over again. And through the Law of Correspondence, and nature's all-encompassing beyond-quantum prowess, its even going to have an impact on something as "mundane" as numbered balls. Also everything is inter-dependent. So while 2, 3, 5, and 253 have their own vibration, we humans as conscious observers as also give it "breath" metaphorically speaking. .Its a co-creation. Our conscious observance is a catalyst in converting, for example, the potential of 253 being drawn into an actuality.. I don't know what that exact brew or alchemy is, but my job is to try and track the resulting phenomenon as best I can,  and then codify it to some degree. Human history in every endeavor is replete with examples: Einstein, Morihei Ueshiba, Euler, J. Goodall, Dr. Henry Thomas Moray, Newton, Bohr, Mandlebrot, the ancient inventors of  Vedic  Mathematics, and etc...all did it in their respective fields, so can we, albeit way imperfectly, at least in the beginning. Then we improve.
      I'll leave you with a quote from mathematician Schneider's Constructing the Universe:
       
      Its a shame that children are exposed to numbers merely as quantities instead of qualities and characters with distinct personalities relating to each other in various patterns. If only they could see numbers and shapes as the ancient did, as symbols of principles available to teach us about the natural structure and processes of the universe and to give us perspective on human nature.
       
      Thanks again for the thread...
      Take care,
      Kola
       

      Our 2nd class in Pick 3 Lore was Space-Timing The Next Draw and we found the Lottery LoreKeeper, Tatiana, staring through her telescope, while we covertly giggled about what does Planet X have to do with what my next draw is? The sleuthy sage quietly intoned, "It is known that when the light(information) from such a distant object reaches our eyes, we are seeing the object as it was in the past & not as it appears Now in the present. Isn't this true for all things, especially numbers, that were drawn years, months, weeks or even just a day in the past? To accurately find the next draw, use the Law of Now(Tatiana's Pillar)". We never giggled again.


        United States
        Member #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: September 30, 2010, 12:28 pm - IP Logged
        Hello Jimmy4164,
         
        Great thread.
        I enjoy and agree with many of Mr. Taleb ideas. But nowhere does he give an example of random occurrences  The examples he gives just prove that oftentimes the herd may get it wrong, but there is always a handful that see perturbations, or patterns no one else sees or sees as well. Mr. Taleb was able to see it, and so were a few others.
         
        There are always patterns Jimmy. When you look at the natural universe, Nature - the Patternmaster(term borrowed form the late-great author Octavia Butler - Brilliant) - is prolific with its cyclical musings. We are slave to these cycles, these patterns too. For example: Bio-rhythms entrained by the Patternmaster through millennia through ancestral DNA and then to you and me. You know that.  The problem is in being able to at first see these patterns, decipher them, and then give them a language. We're just trying to codify observable phenomenon Jimmy.
         
        Mr. Taleb also said that most of the economics metrics, models and theory used to analyze the economy, could not be used to predict the Black Swan drama. But a few did. He argues that these tools actually helped to further blind the actors in the drama  Don't you think that all those tools or rather stats you have pulled to prove the fallibility of systems in the lottery may sometimes be a little blind, and too linear sometimes to hone in on the human mind's creatively dynamic and unmatched ability to see and oftentimes intuit observable phenomenon, and then give it a code like E=mc2 for example? 
         
        You think patterns don't exist in the lottery, because all you may see are balls. On these balls are numbers: 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. The Number 2 has a different quality than the number 5. Isn't that true? And the number 3 even different still. They each have a different vibration, different energy signature.  Put them together as in the number 253, and you have something different altogether. Isn't $2, $3, or $5 different in meaning, and quality than $253. Or if your musically inclined the 2, 3 and 5 notes do not have the same quality sound, frequency or vibration that the 253 note has.
         
        You posit the suggestion that if for example 253 were drawn, there is no way that it would know that 111 was dropped they day before, because balls or numbers are not conscious, So hence its dropping on any particular day is random. Is this correct?
        Don't be fooled by the numbered balls in some plastic tube. They are not inert. Are you aware of the experiment with simple electrons that proved that two electrons were of aware of each other. Don't want to go into it, but if the two electron in that experiment were aware, a bunch of electrons in the form of numbered balls are aware on some level. So just as every sentient being has a level of awareness, we can say that particles like numbered balls also have a level of awareness.  Again, not my opinion. Fact.
         
        Apart from entropy, human events or rather any-sentient-being event can even have a measurable impact on machines like Random Number and Random Event Generators. Check out the experiment with the live baby rabbits and their literally Robotic Mother and how the Mother Robot repeatedly defied its random programming through test after test by drawing nearer to the rabbits way more than the statistical average would dictate than when the rabbits were not there. The book The Field will give you, among other things, the science behind these kinds of experiments. 
        Also Check out:
        1. A Beginner's Guide to Constructing the Universe- Michael S. Schneider (great book- all about numbers and much more)
        2.The Holographic Universe- Michael Talbot
        3.The Field - Lynne McTaggart
        4. Anything by Amit Goswami
         
        When you look around don't you see how Nature uses numbers or rather math to create. It uses the same patterns and same math over and over again. And through the Law of Correspondence, and nature's all-encompassing beyond-quantum prowess, its even going to have an impact on something as "mundane" as numbered balls. Also everything is inter-dependent. So while 2, 3, 5, and 253 have their own vibration, we humans as conscious observers as also give it "breath" metaphorically speaking. .Its a co-creation. Our conscious observance is a catalyst in converting, for example, the potential of 253 being drawn into an actuality.. I don't know what that exact brew or alchemy is, but my job is to try and track the resulting phenomenon as best I can,  and then codify it to some degree. Human history in every endeavor is replete with examples: Einstein, Morihei Ueshiba, Euler, J. Goodall, Dr. Henry Thomas Moray, Newton, Bohr, Mandlebrot, the ancient inventors of  Vedic  Mathematics, and etc...all did it in their respective fields, so can we, albeit way imperfectly, at least in the beginning. Then we improve.
        I'll leave you with a quote from mathematician Schneider's Constructing the Universe:
         
        Its a shame that children are exposed to numbers merely as quantities instead of qualities and characters with distinct personalities relating to each other in various patterns. If only they could see numbers and shapes as the ancient did, as symbols of principles available to teach us about the natural structure and processes of the universe and to give us perspective on human nature.
         
        Thanks again for the thread...
        Take care,
        Kola
         

        Kola,

        Kola said, "So just as every sentient being has a level of awareness, we can say that particles like numbered balls also have a level of awareness.  Again, not my opinion. Fact."

        Fact?

        Since I have yet to see any evidence to prove these are facts, I don't share your beliefs.  I am not saying all of these things are impossible, only that in terms of lottery draws, they have yet to be demonstrated to be true.  So, if ever you devise a coherent, documentable system of choosing numbers based on these ideas which produces winnings with statistical significance at the 95% level or above, I would be interested in reading about it.

        --Jimmy4164



          United States
          Member #93947
          July 10, 2010
          2180 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: September 30, 2010, 1:20 pm - IP Logged

          P.S.  Anyone who is TRULY interested in knowing what contributes to their beliefs and behaviour should:

          Click HERE  !

            Kola's avatar - image
            Blundering Time Traveler

            United States
            Member #28945
            December 25, 2005
            1532 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: September 30, 2010, 3:22 pm - IP Logged

            Kola,

            Kola said, "So just as every sentient being has a level of awareness, we can say that particles like numbered balls also have a level of awareness.  Again, not my opinion. Fact."

            Fact?

            Since I have yet to see any evidence to prove these are facts, I don't share your beliefs.  I am not saying all of these things are impossible, only that in terms of lottery draws, they have yet to be demonstrated to be true.  So, if ever you devise a coherent, documentable system of choosing numbers based on these ideas which produces winnings with statistical significance at the 95% level or above, I would be interested in reading about it.

            --Jimmy4164


            Jimmy, I had prefaced that sentence with my mention of experiments with self-aware electrons. That you did not disprove. But I knew it would be a little challenging for you to accept the next statement after it, which you highlighted above, about sentient beings and numbered balls. In context, what I said was: "Are you aware of the experiment with simple electrons that proved that two electrons were of aware of each other. Don't want to go into it, but if the two electron in that experiment were aware, a bunch of electrons in the form of numbered balls are aware on some level. So just as every sentient being has a level of awareness, we can say that particles like numbered balls also have a level of awareness.  Again, not my opinion. Fact". So just think of balls a bunch of tightly packed electrons if that helps. I also built upon the above idea with my short talk of the role of the conscious observer. That's integral. Anyway... 

            I also read the link of the gambler's fallacy, and I with agree it, and disagree with it.... Many people are guilty of that fallacy. And then there are some who are not guilty of it, and see patterns with some clarity. That is not a paradox. Again, Even Mr. Taleb proved that by being the one, along with a few others, who saw the black swan, patterns of its arrival,  on the horizon.

            Lastly Jimmy, you said, "I am not saying all of these things are impossible, only that in terms of lottery draws, they have yet to be demonstrated to be true". Its nice to know that you acknowledge that these things may be true in certain instances....That I can live with...."but not in terms of lottery draws". Fair enough...Maybe one day you will get your95% proof of system efficacy you require. That's quite steep.  You need that much? Not even the proof of your gamblers fallacy has that degree of certainty, which seems to suggest that you're beliefs may so rigidly locked in there, that no matter what is presented, you may not budge...I dunno...Well with that degree of efficacy, you will probably only see the fruits of such a system's labor, and not its mechanics.

            Take care and may the PATTERNS be with you,

            Kola

             

            Our 2nd class in Pick 3 Lore was Space-Timing The Next Draw and we found the Lottery LoreKeeper, Tatiana, staring through her telescope, while we covertly giggled about what does Planet X have to do with what my next draw is? The sleuthy sage quietly intoned, "It is known that when the light(information) from such a distant object reaches our eyes, we are seeing the object as it was in the past & not as it appears Now in the present. Isn't this true for all things, especially numbers, that were drawn years, months, weeks or even just a day in the past? To accurately find the next draw, use the Law of Now(Tatiana's Pillar)". We never giggled again.


              United States
              Member #93947
              July 10, 2010
              2180 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: October 1, 2010, 11:12 am - IP Logged

              Jimmy, I had prefaced that sentence with my mention of experiments with self-aware electrons. That you did not disprove. But I knew it would be a little challenging for you to accept the next statement after it, which you highlighted above, about sentient beings and numbered balls. In context, what I said was: "Are you aware of the experiment with simple electrons that proved that two electrons were of aware of each other. Don't want to go into it, but if the two electron in that experiment were aware, a bunch of electrons in the form of numbered balls are aware on some level. So just as every sentient being has a level of awareness, we can say that particles like numbered balls also have a level of awareness.  Again, not my opinion. Fact". So just think of balls a bunch of tightly packed electrons if that helps. I also built upon the above idea with my short talk of the role of the conscious observer. That's integral. Anyway... 

              I also read the link of the gambler's fallacy, and I with agree it, and disagree with it.... Many people are guilty of that fallacy. And then there are some who are not guilty of it, and see patterns with some clarity. That is not a paradox. Again, Even Mr. Taleb proved that by being the one, along with a few others, who saw the black swan, patterns of its arrival,  on the horizon.

              Lastly Jimmy, you said, "I am not saying all of these things are impossible, only that in terms of lottery draws, they have yet to be demonstrated to be true". Its nice to know that you acknowledge that these things may be true in certain instances....That I can live with...."but not in terms of lottery draws". Fair enough...Maybe one day you will get your95% proof of system efficacy you require. That's quite steep.  You need that much? Not even the proof of your gamblers fallacy has that degree of certainty, which seems to suggest that you're beliefs may so rigidly locked in there, that no matter what is presented, you may not budge...I dunno...Well with that degree of efficacy, you will probably only see the fruits of such a system's labor, and not its mechanics.

              Take care and may the PATTERNS be with you,

              Kola

               

              Kola,

              "Maybe one day you will get your95% proof of system efficacy you require. That's quite steep.  You need that much?"

              The 95% figure refers to the confidence that your system is NOT producing results that can be attributed to Chance.  The system need not pick a winner 95% of the time to meet this criteria.

              "Not even the proof of your gamblers fallacy has that degree of certainty..."

              My Gambler's Fallacy?  I can't take credit for that name.  Thanks anyway.

              And what degree of certainty does the proof you are referring to meet?

              --Jimmy4164

                Kola's avatar - image
                Blundering Time Traveler

                United States
                Member #28945
                December 25, 2005
                1532 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: October 1, 2010, 3:03 pm - IP Logged

                Kola,

                "Maybe one day you will get your95% proof of system efficacy you require. That's quite steep.  You need that much?"

                The 95% figure refers to the confidence that your system is NOT producing results that can be attributed to Chance.  The system need not pick a winner 95% of the time to meet this criteria.

                "Not even the proof of your gamblers fallacy has that degree of certainty..."

                My Gambler's Fallacy?  I can't take credit for that name.  Thanks anyway.

                And what degree of certainty does the proof you are referring to meet?

                --Jimmy4164

                Certainty of patterns - !00%

                Translating into results - between 0% - 100%.

                Seeing patterns is one thing, making coherent or rather perfect sense of them is something altogether different...

                Thanks for the exchange Jimmy4164...The points you've brought up are very useful.

                Take care,

                Kola

                Our 2nd class in Pick 3 Lore was Space-Timing The Next Draw and we found the Lottery LoreKeeper, Tatiana, staring through her telescope, while we covertly giggled about what does Planet X have to do with what my next draw is? The sleuthy sage quietly intoned, "It is known that when the light(information) from such a distant object reaches our eyes, we are seeing the object as it was in the past & not as it appears Now in the present. Isn't this true for all things, especially numbers, that were drawn years, months, weeks or even just a day in the past? To accurately find the next draw, use the Law of Now(Tatiana's Pillar)". We never giggled again.


                  United States
                  Member #93947
                  July 10, 2010
                  2180 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: October 7, 2010, 3:36 pm - IP Logged

                  This posting will be of interest to those following the Fooled By Randomness thread...

                  http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/214856/1802546

                    CARBOB's avatar - FL LOTTERY_LOGO.png
                    ORLANDO, FLORIDA
                    United States
                    Member #4924
                    June 3, 2004
                    5980 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: October 12, 2010, 9:11 am - IP Logged

                      United States
                      Member #93947
                      July 10, 2010
                      2180 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: October 12, 2010, 11:45 am - IP Logged

                      CARBOB,

                      Benford's Law is very useful for certain applications, especially accounting.  The problem with using Benford's formula to look for fraud in the lottery is that it was derived by fitting to real life non uniform data.  Here's a site that analyzed it relative to many different data sources.  Note how lottery results fit.

                      http://www.physorg.com/news98015219.html

                      You might want to look again at my analysis of PA's Pick-3 results earlier in this thread.  You'll see how just about any kind of arbitrary system of play results in the expected chance number of hits over a long period of time.  The poster you quoted would be better off using more traditional statistical methods to look for lottery fraud.

                      --Jimmy4164


                        United States
                        Member #93947
                        July 10, 2010
                        2180 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: October 12, 2010, 3:54 pm - IP Logged

                        CARBOB,

                        Benford's Law is very useful for certain applications, especially accounting.  The problem with using Benford's formula to look for fraud in the lottery is that it was derived by fitting to real life non uniform data.  Here's a site that analyzed it relative to many different data sources.  Note how lottery results fit.

                        http://www.physorg.com/news98015219.html

                        You might want to look again at my analysis of PA's Pick-3 results earlier in this thread.  You'll see how just about any kind of arbitrary system of play results in the expected chance number of hits over a long period of time.  The poster you quoted would be better off using more traditional statistical methods to look for lottery fraud.

                        --Jimmy4164

                        P.S.  Check here for more information...

                        http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/219401/1808106


                          United States
                          Member #93947
                          July 10, 2010
                          2180 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: October 14, 2010, 3:36 pm - IP Logged
                             
                            Page 20 of 20