The laws of chance dictate that the generators should churn out equal numbers of ones and zeros - which would be represented by a nearly flat line on the graph.
Since this is flat-out wrong (flat, get it?) the idea of deviations having meaning is wrong as well. The chart should, over time, be all over the place. That's random variation.
And how do you go from a random variation to the prediction of an event?
"Bob, the needle just swung. Quick, call the White House, they must be notified that something random is going to occur!"
Just a random guy
in in a hospital, out of a long coma Member
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 | 08:16 AM
Charybdis says: Since this is flat-out wrong (flat, get it?) the idea of deviations having meaning is wrong as well. The chart should, over time, be all over the place. That's random variation.
Well, since theres a 50/50 chance of it turning out a 0 or 1, this means that the line wouldnt truly be flat, but it should never deviate from that slight variation, except for a few coincidences where it would move sightly more due to random variations. The odds of the chart being all over the place would be very slim at best.
Ok, all over the place was a bit excessive, but it won't be a flat line. It will be moving up, down, or flat at chance dictates. Only over a long period of cycles will the chart smooth out. Any particular section could look like, well, anything. It will bob around a mean point but it will only follow that mean occasionally.
Also, since no random number generator it truly random over a significant number of cycles you would descern a slight variation dependant upon just how unrandom the generator is, although for this purpose it would appear to be a frivolous change.
Sharruma
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2005 | 10:51 AM
Firstly. I have some random number generators in my house, they're called dice.
Secondly it's easy to forewarn things after they've happened.
