Real Lottery Facts
- From: "Sherry Davis" <NoSpam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 17:46:47 GMT
John (the troll) is once again spouting his same old mix of misquoted text,
made-up math and out-right lies. He has also digressed to the point that he
now twists other people's remarks around and claims them for his own. He
also seems to have lost the ability to remember his own words (along with
his ability to control his bowels).
As for Gerry (the toadie), his posts read like those of the ill raised child
who, when he is not the center of attention, runs around doing everything
possible to attract attention. Someone should have taught him to sit quietly
when adults are speaking.
Although he claims to "know everything there is about the lottery" he has,
time after time, proven that he knows zip about the lottery (and less about
proper social behavior) and the only contribution that he can make is poor
attempts at lame one liners that usually fall dead to the floor like little
steaming piles of dog poop.
These are his childish way of saying (hopping up and down on one leg, arms
waving), "Hey, look at me, look at me, here I am, look at me."
A bit of history:
.......
John Vs. The English Language:
John's statement "The only way to increase your chance of winning a lottery
jackpot is to buy another ticket." shows that John cannot even cut and paste
without screwing up.
The correct, unsniped, statement is "The only way to improve your odds for
winning a lottery jackpot is to buy another ticket and make sure it doesn't
have the same numbers you already selected on the previous ticket. "
John's misstatement when taken literally, which is how John wants to be
taken, means I can improve my odds by buying ANY two tickets.
When I questioned how purchasing 2 tickets with the same numbers on them
would improve my odds he quickly came back with how I should have read his
mind (now there's a Freddy Krueger type nightmare) and known what he meant.
.......
John Vs. Pretty Much Every Mathematician:
John's statement "Every ball in a lottery bin has precisely the same
probability of coming up next" has been around since the first lottery ball
was drawn and is based on the theoretical law of probability (the operative
word here is "theoretical"). Anyone that has completed high school math
(which is why John is confused) knows that what is true in theory is not
always true in practice. That's why mathematics has been divided into
theoretical and practical math.
Practical math is often described as "Real-life math for the real world" as
opposed to
"Ideas and theorems that hold mathematically true but can not be proven or
disproved by practical application" and "have little value outside the
academic and scientific arena."
The litmus test for the "Every ball in a lottery bin has precisely blah,
blah, blah" theory would be to see if it has been proved out as true in a
"real-life" application. Since no lottery results history show an equal pull
of all numbers then it follows that the lottery is a "series of random
events that operate outside the theoretical laws of probability".
.......
John Vs. Reality:
John loves to rattle on about his "fair coin" and use it in his lottery
arguments. Once again he displays his ignorance of math and his inability to
differentiate between theoretical and practical math. Hopefully one day he
will see that the "fair coin" is a "conceptual model used in probability
theorems" and it simply does not exist in real life.
When I did a full-page illustration of the workings of the "fair coin" and
included lots of documentation, I think John changed his tune just a bit.
I was never sure because it was buried in 4 pages of profanity, name
calling, and poor attempts at intimidation by the use of archaic and misused
verbiage.
However, as best as I could tell, I think he changed his position to "Every
ball in a lottery bin has blah, blah" unless you purchase your play slips
with "fair coins".
Go figure?
.......
John Griffin Vs. Thomas Bayes:
For a couple of hundred years, mathematicians have viewed Bayes's theorem as
the defining mathematical formula for calculating conditional probabilities.
Recently John "the troll" Griffin has declared all of these scholars to be
liars and frauds. He has determined that Bayes's theorem is irrelevant in
calculating probability and it is, in fact, a theorem dealing with, and I
quote, "its causes and effects".
Hummm, lots of fine minds have written theorems on cause and effect but
Bayes was not one of them (as any high school graduate will tell you) so I
guess this can be chalked up to another of Johns <select one or more>
inability to understand basic math, poor education or his propensity towards
lying.
.......
John Vs. Progressive Thinking:
Ask the question "By studying the past draw history might a person be able
to produce a group of numbers that have a better then average chance of
being drawn in the upcoming drawing?" of our resident troll and he will go
absolutely ballistic.
"Can not be done," says he. Yet he cut and pasted this little tidbit "There
will be an infinite number of transient patterns, anomalies and sequences in
an infinitely-repeated stochastic process"
Says I, "Since there are "transient patterns, anomalies and sequences" then
if one can devise a method of identifying them, in their early term, then
they would exploitable".
"Not so" says he, "Why if a person could do that then he might be able to
invent some sort of round device that could be attached to an axel below a
cart like device and transport things more easily, or travel without the use
of horses, or fly above the ground like birds, or even go to the moon."
.......
John Vs. The Lottery Commission:
John makes the statement "If a pattern is 'real,' i.e., a result of some
mechanical or villainous (a real fine word when used properly) defect in the
works, it will have raised alarms in the test runs".
John needs to get on the phone and instruct all the varies lotteries that
their test runs are faulty because anyone that has actually played the
lottery has noticed that, on occasion, a given number would be drawn
repeatedly in successive draws. The longest streak I can remember, if memory
serves, was the same number was drawn in 6 consecutive draws.
......
John AND the Terrorist:
I put together a simplified version of the academic "Sleeping Beauty"
problem that deals with how one should view the odds in a multiple occurring
random event.
(http://www.anthropic-rinciple.com/preprints/beauty/synthesis.pdf.)
which I called the "Terrorist Dice Game".
It put the ability to retain and utilize "indexable values" into a
simplified but practical problem as could be applied to the selection of
lottery numbers. John has evaded the question by ignoring it or taking the
debate off onto one of his famous rabbit trails.
After three days of really hard thought he came up with a silly little math
equation that, although he thought it would stump everyone, was on about a
4th grade level.
The long and short of it was that he was still trying to evade the question
as his answer was, ignoring the rules, he would bring his own die and it
would be loaded.
Why would he avoid so simple a question? Simple, if he were to answer it he
would nullify all of his arguments and his pointy little head would explode.
The Terrorist Dice Game:
You have been captured by terrorist and taken to their camp in the desert.
Here they have a game whose rules are simple.
You must pick a number from 1 to 6.
They then roll a die on the commander's desk.
If you have chosen correctly you can go free.
If you have chosen incorrectly you die a slow horrible death.
Since being held prisoner you have seen this game played out 100 times
before.
You have seen the number 6 come up 85 times, the number 5 come up 5 times,
the number 4 come up 4 times, the number 3 come up 3 times, the number 2 has
come up twice and the number 1 has come up only once.
You are dragged to the commander's office, the guard holds the die in his
hand, you are ordered to choose a number.
What number do you choose and why?
(Sorry, no asking for a fair die, no loaded dice, no asking that it be
rolled in a vacuum chamber, no getting diarrhea of the mouth in the hopes
they lose interest and go away.)
.......
Summation:
John has only a slight ability to parrot, incorrectly, the thoughts of
others and has show that he has no usable knowledge of the lottery. Garry
has less knowledge then John and since it seems to make him happy, he should
continue his role as toadie and not attempt independent thought.
Since neither has managed to advance their positions then let it be declared
throughout the Kingdom that John the Troll and Garry the Toadie "do not have
a hair one on their ass and are frauds, blowhards, ball-less eunuchs, and
should sit down and shut the hell up".
One last thought for John/Garry (names interchangeable):
The next time you have a thought (brain fart), let it go, just let it go.
PS
http://www.accs.net/users/kriel/chapter%20three/roadrunner.jpg
BLEEP-BLEEP
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Real Lottery Facts
- From: John Griffin
- Re: Real Lottery Facts
- Prev by Date: Re: 9.8M v 13.9M
- Next by Date: Re: John Griffin Profile Update
- Previous by thread: Lottery Facts
- Next by thread: Re: Real Lottery Facts
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
