FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Gaz]

i'm pretty sure can only go so far with random odds.

1 in 14million is your chance to predict 6 numbers correctly and win.

You can’t increase those odds because the motion of the balls is random.

[al4x]

i'm pretty sure can only go so far with random odds.

1 in 14million is your chance to predict 6 numbers correctly and win.

You can’t increase those odds because the motion of the balls is random.

there is the possiblityy it isnt random tho

[Gaz]

i'm pretty sure can only go so far with random odds.

1 in 14million is your chance to predict 6 numbers correctly and win.

You can’t increase those odds because the motion of the balls is random.

there is the possiblityy it isnt random tho

Ah-ah but now your going into physics looking into the motion of the balls, in the machine.

[al4x]

i'm pretty sure can only go so far with random odds.

1 in 14million is your chance to predict 6 numbers correctly and win.

You can’t increase those odds because the motion of the balls is random.

there is the possiblityy it isnt random tho

Ah-ah but now your going into physics looking into the motion of the balls, in the machine.

hmm. maybe

[cap-dude]

No, the getting people in a room, getting them to write guess numbers and taking the average. It's all crap as far as I was concerned.

If you flip a coin ten times, and each time it comes up heads. Which side of the coin is most likely to show the next time you flip it?

A lot of people would try and answer that, but the fact is, its still a 50/50 chance that the next result will be heads or tails. A coin doesn't consider previous results or anything like, its just going to be a 50/50 chance every time. The same logic applies to the lottery, its random, previous results can't affect future outcomes. In other words, what Derren was saying was utter toss.

I'm going with the other option he mentioned. He either fixed the lottery or just isn't going to tell us how he went about doing things.

[Amanda]

No, the getting people in a room, getting them to write guess numbers and taking the average. It's all crap as far as I was concerned.

If you flip a coin ten times, and each time it comes up heads. Which side of the coin is most likely to show the next time you flip it?

A lot of people would try and answer that, but the fact is, its still a 50/50 chance that the next result will be heads or tails. A coin doesn't consider previous results or anything like, its just going to be a 50/50 chance every time. The same logic applies to the lottery, its random, previous results can't affect future outcomes. In other words, what Derren was saying was utter toss.

I'm going with the other option he mentioned. He either fixed the lottery or just isn't going to tell us how he went about doing things.

Agreed. There's no way he predicted them like that.

[JamesD89]

No, the getting people in a room, getting them to write guess numbers and taking the average. It's all crap as far as I was concerned.

If you flip a coin ten times, and each time it comes up heads. Which side of the coin is most likely to show the next time you flip it?

A lot of people would try and answer that, but the fact is, its still a 50/50 chance that the next result will be heads or tails. A coin doesn't consider previous results or anything like, its just going to be a 50/50 chance every time. The same logic applies to the lottery, its random, previous results can't affect future outcomes. In other words, what Derren was saying was utter toss.

I'm going with the other option he mentioned. He either fixed the lottery or just isn't going to tell us how he went about doing things.

It's random, but with weighted probabilities. Yeah, heads or tails is 50/50. But I'm arguing that not all the balls going into that machine have an equal chance of coming out. And once a ball has come out, it affects the probability of the next (and not just in line with normal probability theory!!). That's why there would be a pattern.

[Juliet P]

I still think it's utter twaddle.

[Hanwombat]

I still think it's utter twaddle.

[al4x]

No, the getting people in a room, getting them to write guess numbers and taking the average. It's all crap as far as I was concerned.

If you flip a coin ten times, and each time it comes up heads. Which side of the coin is most likely to show the next time you flip it?

A lot of people would try and answer that, but the fact is, its still a 50/50 chance that the next result will be heads or tails. A coin doesn't consider previous results or anything like, its just going to be a 50/50 chance every time. The same logic applies to the lottery, its random, previous results can't affect future outcomes. In other words, what Derren was saying was utter toss.

I'm going with the other option he mentioned. He either fixed the lottery or just isn't going to tell us how he went about doing things.

It's random, but with weighted probabilities. Yeah, heads or tails is 50/50. But I'm arguing that not all the balls going into that machine have an equal chance of coming out. And once a ball has come out, it affects the probability of the next (and not just in line with normal probability theory!!). That's why there would be a pattern.

just need more computing power, as i understand it, you can predict the human body and exactly how a drug will work, with enough computing power, and the weather, 100%.. with enough computing power

[Gaz]

No, the getting people in a room, getting them to write guess numbers and taking the average. It's all crap as far as I was concerned.

If you flip a coin ten times, and each time it comes up heads. Which side of the coin is most likely to show the next time you flip it?

A lot of people would try and answer that, but the fact is, its still a 50/50 chance that the next result will be heads or tails. A coin doesn't consider previous results or anything like, its just going to be a 50/50 chance every time. The same logic applies to the lottery, its random, previous results can't affect future outcomes. In other words, what Derren was saying was utter toss.

I'm going with the other option he mentioned. He either fixed the lottery or just isn't going to tell us how he went about doing things.

It's random, but with weighted probabilities. Yeah, heads or tails is 50/50. But I'm arguing that not all the balls going into that machine have an equal chance of coming out. And once a ball has come out, it affects the probability of the next (and not just in line with normal probability theory!!). That's why there would be a pattern.

Yeh but, lets say ball number 2 comes out that just means that the next ball can only be 1 or 3-45

those remaing 44 balls are completely random unless you could work out there trajectories, but at best you'd only be able to work that out once they were released.

[JamesD89]

No, the getting people in a room, getting them to write guess numbers and taking the average. It's all crap as far as I was concerned.

If you flip a coin ten times, and each time it comes up heads. Which side of the coin is most likely to show the next time you flip it?

A lot of people would try and answer that, but the fact is, its still a 50/50 chance that the next result will be heads or tails. A coin doesn't consider previous results or anything like, its just going to be a 50/50 chance every time. The same logic applies to the lottery, its random, previous results can't affect future outcomes. In other words, what Derren was saying was utter toss.

I'm going with the other option he mentioned. He either fixed the lottery or just isn't going to tell us how he went about doing things.

It's random, but with weighted probabilities. Yeah, heads or tails is 50/50. But I'm arguing that not all the balls going into that machine have an equal chance of coming out. And once a ball has come out, it affects the probability of the next (and not just in line with normal probability theory!!). That's why there would be a pattern.

Yeh but, lets say ball number 2 comes out that just means that the next ball can only be 1 or 3-45

those remaing 44 balls are completely random unless you could work out there trajectories, but at best you'd only be able to work that out once they were released.

I'm not saying you need a model which simulates the draw. You don't need to know the motions of the balls. You just need to recognise a pattern in the results.

He completely avoided mentioning why these patterns form, but it has to be that the machine is already fixed, or biased.

[McLaren Fan]

Well, after much hullabaloo about the trick, I decided to watch his "explanation". I feel as though I've been cheated out of an hour of my life, as none of explanations held any water. They were woolly and undeveloped. I wonder why. f*** you, Derren Brown.

[JamesD89]

Well, after much hullabaloo about the trick, I decided to watch his "explanation". I feel as though I've been cheated out of an hour of my life, as none of explanations held any water. They were woolly and undeveloped. I wonder why. f*** you, Derren Brown.

It was better than Big Brother

[Juliet P]

Well, after much hullabaloo about the trick, I decided to watch his "explanation". I feel as though I've been cheated out of an hour of my life, as none of explanations held any water. They were woolly and undeveloped. I wonder why. f*** you, Derren Brown.

It was better than Big Brother

That's not saying anything! Spending an hour pulling out my own hair with my toes would be better than BB.