Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 19, 2017, 6:21 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Determinism vs Randomness and Chance

Topic closed. 72 replies. Last post 6 years ago by Stack47.

Page 5 of 5
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7343 Posts
Offline
Posted: February 26, 2011, 1:43 pm - IP Logged

To Whom It May Concern,

Jimmy keeps attacking!  How quickly you forget.  If you start at the top of this Topic, which I initiated, you will see that I was trying to remove myself from this futile debate with RL-RANDOMLOGIC.  It's too much like debating evolution.  The 10,000 year old earth types are not content to go about their business with their beliefs, they feel compelled to attack the scientists who present an abundance of evidence to the contrary.  The bible thumpers smile and feel satisfied and proud to proclaim they "ain't related to no monkey," leaving the scientists frustrated and often in legal battles with their children's school districts, or if they're teachers, fighting for their jobs.

If you want to know the truth of what has transpired in this thread, you will reread it from the top.  If you do, I think you will see that I didn't start again aggressively going after RL-RANDOMLOGIC until he reneged on his promise to stay out of my business.  He and his 2 friends have hijacked the Topic.   Don't take my word for this - go ahead, read it again.  It's not that long.

I see garyo1954 just said, "...as soon as I've done the stupidest thing you can imagine, I'll do something stupider just to prove you're wrong!," and he did just that, again!

If you are satisfied when RL-RANDOMLOGIC does a workout for his system the day after a draw, as he did here in one of his latest posts, and feel no need to request that he do one for the next day, even if he doesn't plan on betting, you are a fool!.  If he is able to analyse a draw after the fact without revealing the proprietary aspects of his selection process, there is no reason why he can't do it for the next day.

Here, again, I will attempt to end this exchange by repeating what I wrote above in this thread:

"In the meantime, because the mathematics to theoretically prove or disprove the efficacy of any number selection system for lotteries is not a reasonable goal for most of us here, a computer simulation or a backtest is the only approach that makes any sense.  Consequently, until you are prepared to demonstrate your system in this way, it would really make me happy if you would take the thousands of dollars you've had the good fortune to win, parlay it, and leave those interested free to examine some interesting Monte Carlo Software techniques that I would like to introduce which could prove useful not only in understanding the lottery, but other more general areas where stochastic processes exist.

"You are free to explore your interests in other Topics here, and unless you are mounting attacks on me, either directly, or through innuendo, I will feel no need to interrupt you."

--Jimmy4164

"He and his 2 friends have hijacked the Topic."

Speaking of hijacking topics.

http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/226890

Why did you feel it was necessary before discussing "what does it take to win (mathematically speaking)?" that future posters read a boring article that never came close to answering the question your topic suggested?

I have to give you credit, Jimmy; it's not easy to go completely go off topic in your first post and hijack the thread you started.


    United States
    Member #93947
    July 10, 2010
    2180 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: February 26, 2011, 4:12 pm - IP Logged

    This morning, while reading over my recent posts and the responses they have elicited, I came to the decision that it is a futile endeavor.  Why?  Because after doing a little research, I realize that the reason for much of the strife here over the issue of randomness goes much deeper than the lottery.  It is a fundamental difference in philosophy between those who abhor what I post here and myself.  My opponents have a much more deterministic view of the world than I do.  For example, RL-RANDOMLOGIC has read the Bible at least 40 times:

    http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/222942/1844691

    I have only read what was necessary to satisfy course requirements, most memorably, The Book of Ecclesiastes, which I enjoyed.  Religion for me provides perspective for the study of philosophy, sociology, and psychology.  Here are a couple of references with excerpts that help to explain why I have decided to stop "preaching!"

    Randomness vs Determinism

    http://pjmazumdar.wordpress.com/2010/01/15/randomness-vs-determinism/

    "Determinism would seem to be seriously challenged by quantum theory, which has proved randomness in as far as quantum events are concerned. This is however rejected by determinative thinkers who hold that determinism still holds at the macroscopic level.  Thus a determinism adherent would hold for example that if we could have a sort of supercomputer, he would be able to predict every bubble in a wave or every toss of a coin.  So a determinism adherent would say that in a macroscopic case, say a billiard ball hitting the side of the table and bouncing back, we could predict exactly by knowing the angle at which the ball hits the table and its initial velocity, the resultant angle and velocity after hitting the table.

    "But is this so? In fact, this is not really true and randomness still enters the picture. The path of the ball is not in fact totally predictable but has random fluctuations in its path, but these fluctuations are of a quantum proportion and therefore are not measured in macroscopic measurements."

    Chance

    http://www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/chance.html

    "The core idea of chance and indeterminism is closely related to the idea of causality. Indeterminism for some is simply an event without a cause, an uncaused cause or causa sui that starts a new causal chain. If we admit some uncaused causes, we can have an adequate causality without the physical necessity of strict determinism - which implies complete predictability of events and only one possible future."

    RL-RANDOMLOGIC's chances of convincing me that his Base-Ten-Digits Numerological System gives him an edge in the lottery are about as good as someone convincing a devout Catholic that they have irrefutable evidence that Gabriel was an apprentice carpenter to Joseph of Nazareth who was dismissed shortly after Joseph's wife became pregnant.

    It's futile.  We must agree to disagree.

    --Jimmy4164

    P.S.  I hope the links above provide good sources for further investigation of these issues.

    To Whom It May Concern,

    Jimmy keeps attacking!  How quickly you forget.  If you start at the top of this Topic, which I initiated, you will see that I was trying to remove myself from this futile debate with RL-RANDOMLOGIC.  It's too much like debating evolution.  The 10,000 year old earth types are not content to go about their business with their beliefs, they feel compelled to attack the scientists who present an abundance of evidence to the contrary.  The bible thumpers smile and feel satisfied and proud to proclaim they "ain't related to no monkey," leaving the scientists frustrated and often in legal battles with their children's school districts, or if they're teachers, fighting for their jobs.

    If you want to know the truth of what has transpired in this thread, you will reread it from the top.  If you do, I think you will see that I didn't start again aggressively going after RL-RANDOMLOGIC until he reneged on his promise to stay out of my business.  He and his 2 friends have hijacked the Topic.   Don't take my word for this - go ahead, read it again.  It's not that long.

    I see garyo1954 just said, "...as soon as I've done the stupidest thing you can imagine, I'll do something stupider just to prove you're wrong!," and he did just that, again!

    If you are satisfied when RL-RANDOMLOGIC does a workout for his system the day after a draw, as he did here in one of his latest posts, and feel no need to request that he do one for the next day, even if he doesn't plan on betting, you are a fool!.  If he is able to analyse a draw after the fact without revealing the proprietary aspects of his selection process, there is no reason why he can't do it for the next day.

    Here, again, I will attempt to end this exchange by repeating what I wrote above in this thread:

    "In the meantime, because the mathematics to theoretically prove or disprove the efficacy of any number selection system for lotteries is not a reasonable goal for most of us here, a computer simulation or a backtest is the only approach that makes any sense.  Consequently, until you are prepared to demonstrate your system in this way, it would really make me happy if you would take the thousands of dollars you've had the good fortune to win, parlay it, and leave those interested free to examine some interesting Monte Carlo Software techniques that I would like to introduce which could prove useful not only in understanding the lottery, but other more general areas where stochastic processes exist.

    "You are free to explore your interests in other Topics here, and unless you are mounting attacks on me, either directly, or through innuendo, I will feel no need to interrupt you."

    --Jimmy4164

      Avatar

      United States
      Member #105312
      January 29, 2011
      435 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: February 26, 2011, 6:11 pm - IP Logged

      Jimmy:  "leave those interested free to examine some interesting Monte Carlo Software techniques that I would like to introduce which could prove useful not only in understanding the lottery, but other more general areas where stochastic processes exist."

      I'd be interested in reading about your experiences with Monte Carlo software [insofar as they're Excel friendly].  I hope you'll post them.

      Your views about religion don't interest me.  I don't have strong feelings about your views about religion, but I'd prefer not to know them.  Not because of the religious views you hold, but because deliberately trying to pee on someone's religious foot and calling it rain isn't just rude.  It's calculated rudeness intended to provoke more of the same as has been happening here.

      Please post what you planned originally about your experiences with Monte Carlo systems.

        garyo1954's avatar - garyo
        Dallas, Texas
        United States
        Member #4549
        May 2, 2004
        1834 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: February 26, 2011, 8:08 pm - IP Logged

        HEY JimBOB! Confidante! Familiare! Bud-dy!

        Did something for you today. Called the lottery people and told them I needed the winning numbers. When the little cutie on the other end asked how many I wanted, I told her about 400, she said, "Why don't I send you the whole list?"

        Whoa! We're getting the whole list! THE WHOLE LIST JIMMY!!

        Shhhhh. Don't tell anybody. We want to keep all this money for ourselves.

        Here's my new system. When I get the list, I'll find the date and post the winning number in invisible text. Then you print the post, soak it in.....hydrogen peroxide, or silver nitrate, or maybe nitrogen sulfide, we gotta use something not a lot of people have, so we can 't use beer.

        Next you go buy the number and that's it.

        We're going to be winners!

        What's the first thing you're going to buy, Jimmy?

        I was thinking I'm going to get a CASE of graph paper and about 300 mechanical pencils with .5 B lead. HB lead is okay, but B is smoother and darker.

        Oh, buy a few quack picks too. That way people don't get suspicious when we start winning every night.

        Shhhh! Don't tell

          ameriken's avatar - 33ojew2
          Denver, Co
          United States
          Member #103046
          December 29, 2010
          546 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: February 26, 2011, 11:07 pm - IP Logged

          To Whom It May Concern,

          Jimmy keeps attacking!  How quickly you forget.  If you start at the top of this Topic, which I initiated, you will see that I was trying to remove myself from this futile debate with RL-RANDOMLOGIC.  It's too much like debating evolution.  The 10,000 year old earth types are not content to go about their business with their beliefs, they feel compelled to attack the scientists who present an abundance of evidence to the contrary.  The bible thumpers smile and feel satisfied and proud to proclaim they "ain't related to no monkey," leaving the scientists frustrated and often in legal battles with their children's school districts, or if they're teachers, fighting for their jobs.

          If you want to know the truth of what has transpired in this thread, you will reread it from the top.  If you do, I think you will see that I didn't start again aggressively going after RL-RANDOMLOGIC until he reneged on his promise to stay out of my business.  He and his 2 friends have hijacked the Topic.   Don't take my word for this - go ahead, read it again.  It's not that long.

          I see garyo1954 just said, "...as soon as I've done the stupidest thing you can imagine, I'll do something stupider just to prove you're wrong!," and he did just that, again!

          If you are satisfied when RL-RANDOMLOGIC does a workout for his system the day after a draw, as he did here in one of his latest posts, and feel no need to request that he do one for the next day, even if he doesn't plan on betting, you are a fool!.  If he is able to analyse a draw after the fact without revealing the proprietary aspects of his selection process, there is no reason why he can't do it for the next day.

          Here, again, I will attempt to end this exchange by repeating what I wrote above in this thread:

          "In the meantime, because the mathematics to theoretically prove or disprove the efficacy of any number selection system for lotteries is not a reasonable goal for most of us here, a computer simulation or a backtest is the only approach that makes any sense.  Consequently, until you are prepared to demonstrate your system in this way, it would really make me happy if you would take the thousands of dollars you've had the good fortune to win, parlay it, and leave those interested free to examine some interesting Monte Carlo Software techniques that I would like to introduce which could prove useful not only in understanding the lottery, but other more general areas where stochastic processes exist.

          "You are free to explore your interests in other Topics here, and unless you are mounting attacks on me, either directly, or through innuendo, I will feel no need to interrupt you."

          --Jimmy4164

          "The 10,000 year old earth types are not content to go about their business with their beliefs, they feel compelled to attack the scientists who present an abundance of evidence to the contrary.  The bible thumpers smile and feel satisfied and proud to proclaim they "ain't related to no monkey," leaving the scientists frustrated and often in legal battles with their children's school districts, or if they're teachers, fighting for their jobs."

          Those 10,000 year old earth types are just like you, aren't they? Just like you say...you're not content to go about your business with your beliefs, because here you are on a lottery forum and without provocation you feel compelled to attack other people regarding religious beliefs.

          As JosephusMinimus accurately stated, it is calculated rudeness.


            United States
            Member #93947
            July 10, 2010
            2180 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: February 27, 2011, 12:54 am - IP Logged

            Jimmy:  "leave those interested free to examine some interesting Monte Carlo Software techniques that I would like to introduce which could prove useful not only in understanding the lottery, but other more general areas where stochastic processes exist."

            I'd be interested in reading about your experiences with Monte Carlo software [insofar as they're Excel friendly].  I hope you'll post them.

            Your views about religion don't interest me.  I don't have strong feelings about your views about religion, but I'd prefer not to know them.  Not because of the religious views you hold, but because deliberately trying to pee on someone's religious foot and calling it rain isn't just rude.  It's calculated rudeness intended to provoke more of the same as has been happening here.

            Please post what you planned originally about your experiences with Monte Carlo systems.

            I'm sorry Josephus.  I've changed my mind.  There may be others like yourself among the people responsible for the thousands of views in this Forum in recent months, but they don't seem to have enough interest to participate.  Besides, my use of metaphor, irony, and sarcasm appears to confuse too many people, causing them to be insulted when they needn't be.  Add to that the buffoons who seem to have nothing better to do than disrupt my agenda, and the result is not a good climate for a meaningful exchange of ideas.  I'm working on a Topic idea that might be more understandable here than what I've tried to introduce thus far.  It's kind of a dumbing down of the usual approach used in simulations,  but hopefully, with the use of some colorful graphics to help with attention deficits, it might work.  You may be an exception, but I'm afraid trying to introduce Monte Carlo Simulations in this Forum at this time, given the mentality and attitude of some of the active posters, would be a disaster.  Stay tuned.

              garyo1954's avatar - garyo
              Dallas, Texas
              United States
              Member #4549
              May 2, 2004
              1834 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: February 27, 2011, 3:52 am - IP Logged

              Jimbo!

              No worries! When we get that list of of winners we can all go to Monte Carlo! We'll buy you a brand new 1998 Monte Carlo even! I don't know much about Monte Carlos but the mechanic says it is a LS 3.1 V6 with fault code P0401. Something about the EGR flow is insufficient. That means you can't take it to California, Canada, or Mexico.

              Hey Dude! Nice to hear you are developing a gender to go with your simulation system. Somebody in mystic fo was asking earlier if 0 was male or female. You should check it out.

                RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                United States
                Member #59354
                March 13, 2008
                4079 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: February 27, 2011, 5:07 am - IP Logged

                To Whom It May Concern,

                Jimmy keeps attacking!  How quickly you forget.  If you start at the top of this Topic, which I initiated, you will see that I was trying to remove myself from this futile debate with RL-RANDOMLOGIC.  It's too much like debating evolution.  The 10,000 year old earth types are not content to go about their business with their beliefs, they feel compelled to attack the scientists who present an abundance of evidence to the contrary.  The bible thumpers smile and feel satisfied and proud to proclaim they "ain't related to no monkey," leaving the scientists frustrated and often in legal battles with their children's school districts, or if they're teachers, fighting for their jobs.

                If you want to know the truth of what has transpired in this thread, you will reread it from the top.  If you do, I think you will see that I didn't start again aggressively going after RL-RANDOMLOGIC until he reneged on his promise to stay out of my business.  He and his 2 friends have hijacked the Topic.   Don't take my word for this - go ahead, read it again.  It's not that long.

                I see garyo1954 just said, "...as soon as I've done the stupidest thing you can imagine, I'll do something stupider just to prove you're wrong!," and he did just that, again!

                If you are satisfied when RL-RANDOMLOGIC does a workout for his system the day after a draw, as he did here in one of his latest posts, and feel no need to request that he do one for the next day, even if he doesn't plan on betting, you are a fool!.  If he is able to analyse a draw after the fact without revealing the proprietary aspects of his selection process, there is no reason why he can't do it for the next day.

                Here, again, I will attempt to end this exchange by repeating what I wrote above in this thread:

                "In the meantime, because the mathematics to theoretically prove or disprove the efficacy of any number selection system for lotteries is not a reasonable goal for most of us here, a computer simulation or a backtest is the only approach that makes any sense.  Consequently, until you are prepared to demonstrate your system in this way, it would really make me happy if you would take the thousands of dollars you've had the good fortune to win, parlay it, and leave those interested free to examine some interesting Monte Carlo Software techniques that I would like to introduce which could prove useful not only in understanding the lottery, but other more general areas where stochastic processes exist.

                "You are free to explore your interests in other Topics here, and unless you are mounting attacks on me, either directly, or through innuendo, I will feel no need to interrupt you."

                --Jimmy4164

                Jimmy

                My many request for you to stop interferring in my post were ignored to the point that Todd had to

                lock it.

                I don't think the thousands of views to this topic are made by more then maybe 100 people, many of

                which read for entertainment.  When you agree and promise to stay out of any of my topics I will also 

                do the same for yours.  I also think many others would do the same.  Your consistent remarks about

                how inferior we all are shows your pride and arrogance.  Your statement about how you need to dumb

                down your post before we can even understand what your saying is obtuse. 

                 

                RL

                  garyo1954's avatar - garyo
                  Dallas, Texas
                  United States
                  Member #4549
                  May 2, 2004
                  1834 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: February 27, 2011, 9:11 pm - IP Logged

                  Jim-jim-jimmmmmmmmmmmmy!!!!!!

                  Today I looked at your post on Monte Carlo. Why does it have 1 whole reply?

                  Do you think, maybe, asking someone to install something on their computer and run it for you might be the problem? Excel 2007 already has a What-if Analysis Jimmy. 

                  Why do you rely on these links if you are programming your own Monte Carlo? And why not use Bayesian filters in your Monte Carlo Jimmy?

                  Come on Jimmmmmmmmmmmmy, talk to me. Tell daddy what's bothering you. If I have to, I'll call your mother and tell her to give your tricycle back, but you have to promise to be good, okay?

                    RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                    United States
                    Member #59354
                    March 13, 2008
                    4079 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: February 28, 2011, 1:08 am - IP Logged

                    garyo1954

                    I would like to start another Digit System post and all that is needed is a promise from jimmy to

                    stay away. If he really wants to  move on uninterrupted with his post then I think it would be a 

                    bargin, especially when you consider how often we intellectually challenged peasants clutter his

                    topics with our gross lack of scholastic disciplines.  His scrupulously detailed analysis of statistics

                    coupled with his psychological profile of the mathematical deficient leads one to the conculsion

                    of intament collapse of our entire economic infrastructure.  When one examines the fallacies of

                    of determinism one can also conclude the need for educational rehabilitation among the masses

                    To accomplish this one must expedite the removal of reference to creation and thus in doing so

                    the unprincipled would be forced to accept other methods namely natural sicence which can be

                    explained with slide rule and petri dish.  One could easily from this point expect the human race

                    to accept microprocesser implants which could be directly coupled to eliminate institutions of learning.

                    With each new discovery one would simply attain a upgraded brain.  But wait a durn moment, at

                    what stage would the chip take over and nothing new could be ever found because we had lost

                    all our learning abilities.  My puter can do many thangs but only what I teach it.  I think I will stick

                    with my lump of gray matter and just be considered stupid.

                     

                    RL

                      garyo1954's avatar - garyo
                      Dallas, Texas
                      United States
                      Member #4549
                      May 2, 2004
                      1834 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: February 28, 2011, 1:46 am - IP Logged

                      garyo1954

                      I would like to start another Digit System post and all that is needed is a promise from jimmy to

                      stay away. If he really wants to  move on uninterrupted with his post then I think it would be a 

                      bargin, especially when you consider how often we intellectually challenged peasants clutter his

                      topics with our gross lack of scholastic disciplines.  His scrupulously detailed analysis of statistics

                      coupled with his psychological profile of the mathematical deficient leads one to the conculsion

                      of intament collapse of our entire economic infrastructure.  When one examines the fallacies of

                      of determinism one can also conclude the need for educational rehabilitation among the masses

                      To accomplish this one must expedite the removal of reference to creation and thus in doing so

                      the unprincipled would be forced to accept other methods namely natural sicence which can be

                      explained with slide rule and petri dish.  One could easily from this point expect the human race

                      to accept microprocesser implants which could be directly coupled to eliminate institutions of learning.

                      With each new discovery one would simply attain a upgraded brain.  But wait a durn moment, at

                      what stage would the chip take over and nothing new could be ever found because we had lost

                      all our learning abilities.  My puter can do many thangs but only what I teach it.  I think I will stick

                      with my lump of gray matter and just be considered stupid.

                       

                      RL

                      RL, I would very much like to see you do that. I was getting a valuable lessson seeing what you do. I have a ton of notes, some of which I implemented into a program in an effort to replicate what you are doing. There is still much more to do and with no new information, I'm doing the best I can.

                      Jimmy? He's okay. His rants are underwhelming.

                      So do it! Let's get this ship moving.

                        Avatar
                        bgonçalves
                        Brasil
                        Member #92564
                        June 9, 2010
                        2134 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: February 28, 2011, 7:42 am - IP Logged

                        Hello rl - randonic, I encourage you to open another post about digits, I would like to see
                        The system of digits function in the following condition = if a lottery can only be
                          Provide 70% to 80% in a 49/06 game of trying to predict numbers 4
                          You can be the first 4 numbers = sample (05,12, 25,26) 32 or 42 (25,26,32,42) or (12,25,26,32)
                          As if a lottery of 49 / 6 to 49/04 were the other 20% will be random
                          You talked several times in his posts that hit four 3 rd prize numbers,
                          So let's limb a lottery 49 / 6 to 49 / 4 leaving 20% and 25%
                          For luck! Another example of a lottery system to make the 39/05 digit
                          With it was a lottery of 39 / 4, because the repetition of an event is likely key to
                          You can make a perfect array of 49 by 4 by 4 =? A pattern I'm seeing
                        It's a lottery to divide into seven sectors with seven numbers and assign seven letters (a, b, c, d, e, f, g)
                        Almost nap repetition of position number 1, the example given in section (a) hardly another industry will not repeat on (a), depends on the size of the lottery!

                          Avatar
                          Kentucky
                          United States
                          Member #32652
                          February 14, 2006
                          7343 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: March 1, 2011, 4:48 pm - IP Logged

                          In some states triples and quads are sold out almost every day so when a triple or quad is drawn, they will payout the maximum payoff allowed by their rules. I don't know how many losing days a state lottery would have to experience before closing the game if someone did actually share a winning system with thousands of other players.

                          Like these folks who won playing 2222 ... http://www.lotterypost.com/news/223381/1844693

                          Illinois Pick 4 lottery winners in huge line for record payout

                          Maryland is paying off $7 million to many quad players today too.