|
|
Posted by CoreyWhite on 02/20/07 22:01
On Feb 20, 4:59 pm, "CoreyWhite" <CoreyWh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 4:25 pm, "CoreyWhite" <CoreyWh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 20, 4:11 pm, "CoreyWhite" <CoreyWh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 20, 2:45 pm, PerfectReign <perfectre...@xr4ti.cotse.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 05:51:19 -0800, a rock fell the sky, hitting
> > > > CoreyWhite on the head, and inspiring the following:
>
> > > > > Here is the algorithm I am planning.
>
> > > > > 1) Sort all of the words in the old testament alphabetically.
> > > > > 2) Sort all of the words in the new testament alphabetically
> > > > > backwards.
> > > > > 3)Use the two new books as consistent keys to unlock the third book,
> > > > > which is complete but inconsistent.
> > > > > 4) We create a fourth book that references the first 3, and looks at
> > > > > the first 2 ordered, alphabetic sets, as being mathematically
> > > > > consistent, and looks at the third book as being a complete set of the
> > > > > other two books.
>
> > > > > So because the fourth book keeps everything together in an object
> > > > > oriented set by itself, it can be complete and consistent without
> > > > > letting the objects it contains contradict themselves.
>
> > > > You know, you are beginning to sound like my senile grandfather a few
> > > > years before he died.
>
> > > > He kept rattling on about how he discovered a new math method he'd call,
> > > > "casting out nines."
>
> > > > --
> > > > k
>
> > > That makes good since to me. You just cast out the "nay" sayers, and
> > > accumulate power from withinside of numbers. One old man on his death
> > > bead? But combine it with the youth and grandchildren, and you have a
> > > force more powerful.
>
> > > What do you suppose he may have meant when he talked to you about
> > > these things?
>
> > Come to think of it, the theory reminds me of the TV show Deal or No
> > Deal.
>
> > Let say you take all the numbers from 0-9 and arranged them randomly
> > in 10 cases.
>
> > Like this:
>
> > 6 3 1 8
> > 0 2 7 9
>
> > Now this sorting may not be perfectly random, but they are all 9
> > numbers which we have casted out at random.
> > If we didn't know where the cases were, now how would we find them?
>
> > Well if you pick one at random, you have an idea where the rest of
> > them have landed.
>
> > How?
>
> > Because the ordering is random! That means you can eliminate all of
> > the logical patters. And as long as you have a sense of the patterns
> > the cases could be in which are most random. Then you have a much
> > better guess of knowing where they will be.
>
> > Random algorithms will almost never generate this order:
>
> > 12345
> > 67890
>
> > Because they are trying to be random. And only a human could do it!
>
> Furthermore we can say that if we had 6 sided dice, that were all
> universally labeled with 9's the dice would be 100x more random and
> this principal would operate even more abundantly.
>
> When you roll a 6 sided die, the odds seem 1 in 6 of which way you
> roll it. But because of the fact that you are casting them out
> randomly you can usually eleminate all of the simple patterns.
>
> But when you have changed all sides of your dice to be 9's then
> depending on how you roll the dice they will be either a 6 or a 9.
> See? So you have a new metalevel of randomness. And now when you
> roll the dice you can eleminate even more complicated logic. So you
> can be sure when rolling a set of dice they will all be perfectly fair
> and sort in truly random orders and patterns. Instead of sometimes
> falling so they are all 6's or all are 9's.
>
> Try the experiment and you will be surprised. But you need custom all
> 6's dice or all 9's. And you need a good number of them, say 5.
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casting_out_nines
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|