The FUTURE is DYNAMIC.
DYNAMIC is a label given to the future, it is dynamic because it has not yet come into being. It is variable and dynamic because of this, some aspects of the future are predictable such as the next keystroke I make. Other aspects of the future are ambiguous, clouded in a multitude of decisions and directions that those decisions take them on.
I also use the term dynamic to describe my data analysis. If I rely on static data I get static outcomes, outcomes that span many games. ie. hit counting, the static measure of hit counts only changes infrequently as to which number it is associated with.
So I look beyond the static data to a series of DYNAMIC attributes that ALL the numbers possess. It is these DYNAMIC attributes that present a fuller and clearer but at the same time patchy mosaic of the numbers. I then utilise a number of rationalisation and normalisation techniques to fill in the gaps in my mosaic of data.
This gives me a present snapshot of ALL the data, granted that around 30% of that data is filled gaps but it follows a natural LOG pattern as well as some indexed polynomial equations that allow me to then project forward to what might potentially happen. I have now put myself into a position of guessing the next key stroke, so far this is proving to be around 80% successful. But my guesswork is underpinned by a past framework of performance measures, it is an educated guess based on where the measures fall and against which ones fall into a potential selection criteria.
I am the equivalent of between 5 to 10 keystrokes behind, I can predict that I will type this whole next sentence but the potential for interruption and exact wording of the thoughts that I want to express will inevitably vary the outcome of the exact words and phrasing, let alone the exact lettering.
So my method is not an exacting one, it is a method that gives close proximity, that follows a theme or a pattern, not always to the exact wording or lettering but very close to it.
RANDOM??? mmmm. I agree, I agree that superficially it is for all intents and purposes random in it's appearance, random is it's measures utilising existing static analysis, random in it's direct link to the actual numbers as it is not the numbers that govern the underlying links, the numbers simply present as subjects of the underlying links that are taking place and having a bearing on the next set of numbers that present themselves. So yes the numbers are fully random in they way they present and represent for any Lottery game.
But at the same time no they are not entirely random, they are not random because they represent something deeper that I have started to scratch the surface of, something that I constantly am bamboozled at the incredible simplicity of in a complexity of association. The actual math behind them is not rocket science, what is difficult to understand is the interaction and relationship or behaviour of them to each other. This is also a dynamic that I am yet to fully understand.
MATRIX .... mmmm let's not open that can of worms.