Looney Tune Random Number Theories NOT Wanted.....

[MauiSunset]

I'm not a mathematician - I'm a retired Aerospace Engineer who has forgotten most of the statistics I was taught 40+ years ago.

I'd like to address the totally wacky theories that float around Roulette sites about random numbers - they have no bearing in reality that I can see.

Here's a great link to start: nolinks://nolinks.math.utah.edu/~alfeld/Random/Random.html

Basically I'd like to gather the tools needed to prove that a RNG or a wheel is generating random numbers or pseudo random numbers.

This also address the crazy idea of Dealer's Signature from a physical Roulette wheel, Law of the Third, and other dribble.

Over time I'm going to try to find a simple way of submitting a stream of numbers from a Roulette wheel/RNG and verifying that the stream is indeed random.

Once proved random then our math says there is nothing in that random stream - no information is there in any kind.

If you'd like to help fine, but I will slowly do the research and I'll take any help that comes along.

If you've got a wacky theory about random numbers just go post your own theories on your own - I'm simply trying to verify that a stream of numbers is truly random and void of any information or data.

On the other hand, if you've got links to scientific/mathematical  websites that prove there is all kinds of data/information in random numbers then I'd like to see those articles.  Links to UFO websites are not needed.

Thanks in advance for any help......

[MauiSunset]

Thanks for the help.

However, I'm really looking at one program that will subject a random stream to the 5 or so statistical tests that everyone seems to hold dear in this area.  Each test must submit it's findings and when all 5 tests are done a few numbers give the result in terms of statistical confidence that the stream is random and void of information/data.

[MauiSunset]

No doubt about it, there are clusters/clumps and all kinds of patterns in random numbers - that's why it isn't hard to see the Marquee all Black or all Red many times in the evening.

That doesn't mean anything!

It's like taking a handful of sand and throwing it on the ground - you will find the same exact thing.

It's how random numbers behave - they are NOT uniform.

Taking the output of a Roulette wheel and using that to make forecasts is like taking a handful of sand and throwing it on the ground.  You would NOT expect to find uniformity - you expect to find clumps and voids and all kinds of patterns.

That's what makes Random Numbers so fascinating - they just don't look random and fool you.

I'd go further and speculate that the better your brain is at finding patterns the more enticing random numbers looks.

That's why there is a Marquee at the Roulette wheel and why everyone is encouraged to use any kind of system they want.

At the Black Jack table it is frowned upon - card counting was for real and the reason the casinos went to 6 decks per shoe, and if you are way too attentive to the cards and follow a specific betting pattern 2 ex-football players will show you the door, after having your face photographed for the facial recognition database that all casinos use and contribute to.

You've got to look at what the casino's allow - its for their benefit and not yours........

[MauiSunset]

OK, I can do that too. You have a bag of gold in your hand. "That doesn't mean anything" either. Now you have nothing in your hand.

That was fun. I didn't get a drink but it was entertaining just the same.

A random number stream is EXACTLY the same as a handful of sand thrown on the floor - EXACTLY.

Sure I see clumps and voids and all kinds of patterns - they are everywhere.

So how does that help me with the next handful of sand?

The very definition of Random Numbers means that there will be clumps and voids and patterns of all kinds - it means nothing at all.

The Gamblers' Fallacy is based upon the exact opposite theory - that random numbers are uniform and if Black has spun out 15 times that there is a much higher probably of a Red than a Black on the next spin.

So folks want to abuse random numbers both for being full of patterns and devoid of patterns.  The truth is the patterns or lack of patterns are the signature of random numbers and mean nothing at all....

[MauiSunset]

Prove that it means nothing at all. Until you prove that it means nothing at all I will not believe you.

Here is what I really think is going on here. You don't know how to test to see if any clump, void, or pattern will hold up and continue. You don't have a management method for that.

OH! Thanks for this moment. You just gave trends a new set of terms. In a way you already have a loosely oriented syntax for trend identification of your own. Congratulation for illustrating step one of debating with you. I won that one. Ha! "clump, void, or pattern" means nothing.

Throw a handful of sand on the ground - that's all the proof you need to find patterns and voids - it means nothing in the next handful of sand.

It's not my job to prove that random numbers are random - science and math prove it with the lack of any kind of evidence that the pattern observed can be used for any purpose.

That's the challenge to folks who believe that random numbers are not random.

That's how the Scientific Method works - You propose a hypothesis, test it, draw conclusions, and exchange the new material.

There is no material, I can find, that support all the wacky theories found in Roulette in the area of random numbers.

If you want to prove random number patterns can be used to predict future bets then:
1) Propose your hypothesis
2) Conduct experiments
3) Draw conclusions from those experiments
4) Publish results so others can duplicate your tests to add credence to your hypothesis

Here's a link to help: nolinks://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/appendixe/appendixe.html

The only "proof" is voodoo math that can't be verified by anything but voodoo math.....

[Mike]

Prove that it means nothing at all. Until you prove that it means nothing at all I will not believe you.

Probability theory already proves it can't be done. It's up to you to show that probability theory's assumptions are wrong. ie; you have to show that outcomes are not independent.

You were going to do that anyway, so where's the beef? 

[MauiSunset]

What you are suggesting MauiSunset is validation. I'll validate this by doing it the old fashioned way. I'll visit you with a throng of doers that tend to undermine your respectful sense of reality. Look out, they are sneaking up on your blind side.

You really slay me. First it's your poof by demonstration demand and now it's seeking peer reviewed validation. You sure are a pushy runt. I'll bet you have a pocket protector and a few sharpened pencils in your shirt pocket. I'll bet there is white tape on the center of your glasses too.

I had Lasik surgery done 12 years ago - 20/10 vision thank you.

I dumped the pocket protector and slipstick for an Android powered cell phone that gives me 4G service here in Maui at 4.5 MB - more than enough to power my netbook and see a live spinning Roulette wheel and have up the live chatroom here.  Something that has eluded you and your continued excuse for playing in real time.

I try to keep up with technology - try it.....

[MauiSunset]

OK, I'll prove it right now. You do the math. So you begin to see 5 reds in a row. While this happened another thing happened too. It was the start of 20 reds in a row. So at spin 6 you began to bet red for 10 spins in a row. What is the percentage for winning all ten of these bets? During that sequence the real percentage was 100%. You see, it all comes down to context. In an isolated sequence like this all the theoretical probability rarely conforms to long term probability stats. All it took to test this was to bet the first bet red. It only took a 50/50 bet to test this condition. You problem is that you want all risk to be fully blind.

What was I thinking - I need to buy a time machine.

Jeez - you got me there...

[MauiSunset]

Hey dick brain, I live beyond the range of Verizon's 3G and 4G coverage. So go jump in an active volcano. The world is not a convenient occurrence that makes your life a grand coveted experience.

More excuses - doesn't that get tiring after a while?

You make crazy claims, offer no proof, and refuse to demo your crazy claims in real time.

I honestly don't know why you make these insane claims - I know there is nothing there, the more you protest and offer excuses it should become clear to many more here.

You can't demo your ridiculous ideas because they won't last but seconds in front of a live audience.  You're the one making them you must expect others to question your ideas.

Don't you?

[MauiSunset]

I already told you weenie breath. You don't rate a demonstration of the proof. But you do rate being proved wrong by a throng of those that bothered to get what I'm teaching them now and working it all out. Yes, it will take time. But I will answer every question with information on how it all relates to the topic and the threads. You only serve one purpose here. Your mother wants you to rub her back and cook her dinner. So get off your basement stool and get up there and cook the grub -- bub. You will never be in any condition to complain. You never ask questions. Why is that?

I don't believe a word you say - not one word.

You will never demo a system that doesn't exist but in your daydreams.

The proof is upon you - no one else.....

[MauiSunset]

That's just fine. I will delete all your posts at my private section. You are now banned officially from that section.

Thank you God...

[MauiSunset]

-