Re: JSH: Math journals do not just die

[jstevh@xxxxxxx]
.... [endless repetition of points already covered] ...

I've asked for REASONS.

And you've both been given and pointed at answers. Read Brent's paper
for a start. You not only want a simple answer, but a simple-minded
one, and that's not going to happen.

This is all typical with you. When a brief account of theory is given,
you whine about it, complaining that it's "math-ese". When someone
makes a real effort to write a tutorial explaining it all in simple
terms, you whine about that, complaining about "long posts" used as a
"tactic" to "wear you down" or "distract". In neither case do you pay
any attention to the knowledge given to you. You continue to demand
it, and no matter how often it's given to you.

Follow the references provided, and try to learn something yourself.
The reasons for you never making progress don't actually have to do
with other people.

...
Yet I picked x=192 and asked you to make predictions on p mod 3 with
the first 100 primes that follow it.

So where is your example?

You've already been given a computer program to make such predictions,
and results of running it have already been posted.

....

What if you have 10,000 flips? Is that enough?

Or is the answer still, not enough information?

Same reply as last time:

You first need to state a specific hypothesis to be tested, and name
the specific test you intend to use. For example, if the hypothesis is
that all possible 1024 outcomes of flipping a coin 10 times occur
uniformly at random, and you want to use a 1024-bin chi-square test,
then a minimum of 1024*6 10-toss trials is good practice, to ensure
that the expected count in each bin is at least 6. The chi-square test
is then equally sensitive to whether 10 heads in row occurs more than 6
times, or /less/ than 6 times. This has all been explained before,
although previously in more detail.

....

How about just checking the coin?

For the last time from me, your "coin" is a computable function, and
therefore cannot be random under any accepted meaning of the word. The
value of your sequence at p is mod(p, 3), and that's wholly determined.
The time between radioactive decays is an example of something
(currently thought to be) truly random.

...

.