 |
|
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Topic : "Random Number generators predicting future" |
Drunken Monkey
member
Member #
Joined: 08 Feb 2000
Posts: 1016
Location: mothership
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2005 10:05 pm |
 |
 |
http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=126649#121
| Quote: |
But the project threw up its greatest enigma on September 11, 2001.
As the world stood still and watched the horror of the terrorist attacks unfold across New York, something strange was happening to the Eggs.
Not only had they registered the attacks as they actually happened, but the characteristic shift in the pattern of numbers had begun four hours before the two planes even hit the Twin Towers. |
interesting, although probably exaggerated stuff.
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:19 am |
|
|
It's handy how it only predicts things that have already happened . . .
_________________
brian.prince|light.comp.paint |
|
| Back to top |
|
[Shizo]
member
Member #
Joined: 22 Oct 1999
Posts: 3938
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:54 am |
|
|
What you want it to do, predict things BEFORE they happened?
Silly prince! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Drunken Monkey
member
Member #
Joined: 08 Feb 2000
Posts: 1016
Location: mothership
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:41 am |
|
|
patterns change drastically before the events.. you crackerjacks
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud |
|
| Back to top |
|
oDD
member
Member #
Joined: 07 May 2002
Posts: 1000
Location: Wroclaw Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 7:43 am |
|
|
| [Shizo] wrote: |
| Silly prince! |
_________________
portfolio | art blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:12 am |
|
|
| Drunken Monkey wrote: |
| patterns change drastically before the events.. you crackerjacks |
Pick an event, comb the data selectively, and you'll find your drastic change. Notice that the lead time for the "predictions" is always different? Maybe it's real, but that's for peer review to decide.
_________________
brian.prince|light.comp.paint |
|
| Back to top |
|
Drunken Monkey
member
Member #
Joined: 08 Feb 2000
Posts: 1016
Location: mothership
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:34 am |
|
|
Why do you assume leading up time should be the same? I mean based on what? Your guess is as good as theirs. I think its interesting that these things started fluctuating before so many major events... maybe there is something to it. I remember reading a lot about human mind being able to affect random number generators when i was in high school, it was fascinating at the time.
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:34 am |
|
|
The problem is the way they're looking for predictions. There seem to be two ways they go about it:
1 - event is known, data is analyzed to see if it predicts the event
2- data shows irregularity, world news is combed to find repsonsible event
In the case of situation 1, it is possible to comb any set of data so that it looks like something you're expecting to find, especially if the lead time is flexible and you can find your indicators anywhere within a 12-hour window of the event.
In the case of situation 2, we encounter the problem of deciding what is a significant event. What about all the things that seem significant that happen every day that aren't reflected in the data? What do these machines consider significant? It presently seems like just about anything is fair game, as long as it happens to fall on a nice spike in the dataset.
Does it warrant investigation? Sure. But it has to be approached in a way that leaves no room for human subjectivity. We are built to find patterns and meaning where none exist (see art, religion) . . . the work that's been done on this so far strikes me as highly subjective in nature.
_________________
brian.prince|light.comp.paint |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:36 am |
|
|
| Quote: |
An evening with Dean Radin
by Claus Larsen
I spent one of the last evenings of September 2002 attending a lecture by Dean Radin, author of "The Conscious Universe", on the Upper East Side, Manhattan. Radin told about the Global Consciousness Project, which is described as:
"a world-spanning network of devices sensitive to coherence and resonance in the mental domain. Continuous streams of data are sent over the internet to be archived and correlated with events that may evoke a world-wide consciousness. Examples that appear to have done so include both peaceful gatherings and disasters: a few minutes around midnight on any New Years Eve, the first hour of NATO bombing in Yugoslavia, the Papal visit to Israel, a variety of global meditations, several major earthquakes, and now September 11."
Global Consciousness Project
Around the world, random number generators ("eggs") are producing a random string of one's and zero's, which are then recorded for later analysis. The theory is that a "global consciousness" can influence this random string of one's and zero's.
O.J.: A global event?
Radin gave several examples of how GCP had detected "global consciousness". One was the day O.J. Simpson was acquitted of double-murder. We were shown a graph where - no doubt about that - the data formed a nice ascending curve in the minutes after the pre-show started, with cameras basically waiting for the verdict to be read. And yes, there was a nice, ascending curve in the minutes after the verdict was read.
However, about half an hour before the verdict, there was a similar curve ascending for no apparent reason. Radin's quick explanation before moving on to the next slide?
"I don't know what happened there."
It was not to be the last time we heard that answer.
September 11th: A study in wishful thinking.
It was obvious that the terror attacks of that day should make a pretty good case for Global Consciousness (GC). On the surface, it did. There seemed to be a very pronounced effect on that day and in the time right after.
There were, however, several problems. The most obvious was that the changes began at 6:40am ET, when the attacks hadn't started yet. It can of course be argued when the attacks "started", but if the theory is based on a lot of people "focusing" on the same thing, the theory falls flat - at 6:40am, only the attackers knew about the upcoming event. Not even the CIA knew. Hardly enough to justify a "global" consciousness.
...during the days before the attacks, there were several instances of the eggs picking up data that showed the same fluctuation as on September 11th. When I asked Radin what had happened on those days, the answer was:
"I don't know."
This was explained as precognition: Tests have indicated that a person can anticipate whether the picture on a monitor will be "positive" or "negative", e.g. a cute little bunny or a snake ready to bite. Radin did acknowledge that people react differently to pictures of this kind (he used the example of Jimmy Carter who was once attacked by a huge bunny and the herpetologist who would think the snake was "cute"), but the results do show that people react a little before the picture pops up. However, since these tests are done with the pictures popping up at regular intervals, it isn't hard to imagine that people learn very fast to count the seconds until the next picture is visible.
These tests looked at people's physical reactions. Unfortunately, there are no records of people being specifically "jumpy" during the two hours before the attacks. The level of surprise speaks its clear language. Nobody saw this coming.
It was not explained why there were no signs of this precognition in the other examples.
Another serious problem with the September 11 result was that during the days before the attacks, there were several instances of the eggs picking up data that showed the same fluctuation as on September 11th. When I asked Radin what had happened on those days, the answer was:
"I don't know."
I then asked him - and I'll admit that I was a bit flabbergasted - why on earth he hadn't gone back to see if similar "global events" had happened there since he got the same fluctuations. He answered that it would be "shoe-horning" - fitting the data to the result.
Checking your hypothesis against seemingly contradictory data is "shoe-horning"?
For once, I was speechless.
The Maharishi (Non)Effect
Radin then brought up the (in)famous 1993 experiment in Washington, DC.
"In 1993, there was a high profile demonstration of the Maharishi Effect in Washington D.C. A 27 member independent scientific review board included representatives from the Police and Washington universities. Predictions of reduced violent crime, improved quality of life, and higher approval ratings for government were lodged in advance with the review board. The predictions were supported during the assembly attended by 4000 TM-Sidhi participants. There was a 24% reduction in violent crime during the six week period of the assembly compared to the trend predicted by time-series analysis of preceding data."
Natural Law Party Fact Sheet
Radin showed a graph which - again on the surface - showed that there indeed was a drop in violent crime during the period where the participants thought about peace.
One thing immediately caught my attention, but somebody else beat me to it: Some days before the experiment, there was a similar drop in crime, which looked percentage-wise about the same. When asked about what caused this drop, Radin answered:
"I don't know."
Spotting a pattern here, I called Radin on his methods of research: How could he say that the later drop in violent crime was caused by the Maharishi Effect, when he didn't go back and check what caused the previous drop?
His answer: "This was a planned experiment."
When I then pointed out that September 11th was not exactly a planned experiment, he went back to his previous stance: That it would be shoe-horning, etc., etc.
I asked him if he did go back and could not find anything that would qualify as a global event on those days that had the same fluctuation as his examples, wouldn't that show the theory false?
His answer?
"Not necessarily."
I don't think he appreciated it when I used the phrase "You are selecting your data". It was the only time his brow was furrowed.
I dropped it there and then. It was clear that Radin was selecting his data. He did not seek out alternative explanations for his theories. Shoe-horning indeed.
Regarding the Maharishi experiment, it should be mentioned that even though there did seem to be a drop in violent crime during the experiment, the data are flawed. Robert Park describes the event in his book, "Voodoo Science":
"The weeks that followed seemed like something out of an old mad-scientist movie - an experiment that had gone horribly wrong. Each Monday morning, the Washington Post would tally the gruesome weekend slayings in the city. Participants in the project seemed serenely unaware of the mounting carnage around them as they sat cross-legged in groups throughout the city, eyes closed, peacefully repeating their mantras. The murder rate for those two months reached a level unmatched before or since.
At the end of the demonstration period, Hagelin, smiling his unworldly smile, acknowledged that murders were indeed up "due to the unusually high temperatures," but "brutal crime" was down. One could only imagine that the murders were being committed more humanely - perhaps a clean shot between the eyes rather than a bludgeoning.
Over the coming year, Hagelin promised, the results would be carefully analyzed according to strict scientific standards. As promised, Hagelin was back a year later with a fifty-five-page report of the results of the project. It was a clinic in data distortion. A beaming Hagelin announced at a press conference that, during the period of the experiment, violent crime had been reduced by a remarkable 18 percent. "An eighteen-percent reduction compared to what?" a puzzled reporter for the Washington Post asked, recalling the dreadful murder rampage of the summer of '93. Compared to what it would have been if the meditators had not been meditating, Hagelin explained patiently. "But how could you know what the rate would have been?" the reporter persisted. That had been arrived at, Hagelin responded with just a trace of irritation, by means of a "scientifically rigorous time-series analysis" that included not only crime data but such factors as weather and fluctuations in Earth's magnetic field."
Source: Robert Park, Voodoo Science, p. 29.
Bad, bad science!
The rest of the lecture was the same old rant against "established" science. Radin could not abstain from several jabs at the "established" scientific community: We got the well-known swill that scientists are afraid to think outside the box, that the results were ignored, we are on the threshold of a new era, blah, blah, blah.
Radin is right in as much as the scientific communities being somewhat conservative. He completely ignores that especially young scientists, eager to make their mark, would be thrilled to do this kind of research - just think of the funding, fame and glory, should they be able to prove anything paranormal!
Alas, such fame and glory only comes with the existence of real results. So far, we have seen none.
It should be said that Radin himself admits that none of all this is proof of a Global Consciousness. He calls it "indication".
Roger Nelson, Director of the GCP also admits that no proof has been found:
"I want to acknowledge that I like the notion of Global Consciousness, but that this idea is really an aesthetic speculation. I don't think we have real grounds to claim that the statistics and graphs representing the data prove the existence of a global consciousness. On the other hand, we do have strong evidence of anomalous structure in what should be random data, and clear correlations of these unexplained departures from expectation with well-defined events that are of special importance to people. The events share a common feature, namely, that they engage our attention, and draw us into a common focus."
Global Consciousness Project
Postlude
My overall impression of Radin is that he is sincere, albeit way too much infatuated with his theories. He clearly selects his data and is not all that interested in ways of falsifying his theories.
While it is humanly understandable, it is scientifically unacceptable.
Is something happening? If we can refrain from equating "anomalies" with "psi", it does seem that something is going on. Whether it is flawed research or a real phenomenon is still out. But when we take into account that Radin and GCP are not all that eager to falsify their own theories (as well as quoting Sagan and Hyman out of context to support their own agenda when in fact neither do!), it is very hard for me to accept that a real phenomenon is happening.
But, hey, I could be wrong! |
_________________
brian.prince|light.comp.paint |
|
| Back to top |
|
Drunken Monkey
member
Member #
Joined: 08 Feb 2000
Posts: 1016
Location: mothership
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:02 pm |
|
|
Okay, you quoted an article about Dean Radin and some dude refuting his book on Global Consciousness as voodoo science. What does Dean Radin have to do with Nelsons research?
from original article:
| Quote: |
| These ran constantly, day in day out, generating millions of different pieces of data. Most of the time, the resulting graph on his computer looked more or less like a flat line. |
Why doesnt it stay flat all the time as it should?
| Quote: |
| In the case of situation 1, it is possible to comb any set of data so that it looks like something you're expecting to find, especially if the lead time is flexible and you can find your indicators anywhere within a 12-hour window of the event. |
Why are you so obscessed with static lead time? What is this rigidity? Where is this 12 hour window coming from? What difference does it make on how long it is? In Technical Analysis (stocks) uptrend/downtrend is often there long before it looks like anything is going to happen. You can actually see insiders buying or selling. And then whoila... the company goes bankrupt or gaps up to 50% overnight on some news. Or often nothing happends at all, because maybe the deal fell through, or maybe the company had their asses saved by new funding. Its irrelevant. All the while you can see the fluctuation on the graph long before, and there is no set lead time of any kind. The fluctuation is there and it is caused by something. Why would it be different here? Its not exact science... some event may happen, some may not, but any kind of anticipation/awareness is reflected on Global Consciousness. Supposedly... at least thats the idea.
| Quote: |
| 2- data shows irregularity, world news is combed to find repsonsible event |
You hardly need to comb the news to find an event that would (theoretically) reflect in global consciousness on the same level sept 11 or this tsunami did. I see how you think though, data shows significant deviation equal to that of a comet the size of texas hitting NY, but nothing really happened in X window. The whole thing must be bullshit then. Because you know your time windows.
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 12:49 pm |
|
|
| Drunken Monkey wrote: |
Okay, you quoted an article about Dean Radin and some dude refuting his book on Global Consciousness as voodoo science. What does Dean Radin have to do with Nelsons research?
|
Planning Contributors: Dick Bierman, John Walker, Greg Nelson, Dean Radin, Jiri Wackermann, Stephan Schwartz, Charles Overby
| Quote: |
from original article:
| Quote: |
| These ran constantly, day in day out, generating millions of different pieces of data. Most of the time, the resulting graph on his computer looked more or less like a flat line. |
Why doesnt it stay flat all the time as it should?
|
Because you'd need an infinite number of random sources in order to eliminate variability.
| Quote: |
Why are you so obscessed with static lead time? What is this rigidity? Where is this 12 hour window coming from? What difference does it make on how long it is? In Technical Analysis (stocks) uptrend/downtrend is often there long before it looks like anything is going to happen. You can actually see insiders buying or selling. And then whoila... the company goes bankrupt or gaps up to 50% overnight on some news. Or often nothing happends at all, because maybe the deal fell through, or maybe the company had their asses saved by new funding. Its irrelevant. All the while you can see the fluctuation on the graph long before, and there is no set lead time of any kind. The fluctuation is there and it is caused by something. Why would it be different here? Its not exact science... some event may happen, some may not, but any kind of anticipation/awareness is reflected on Global Consciousness. Supposedly... at least thats the idea.
|
Similar fluctuations appear on different days, and Radin discounts them by simply saying he doesn't know what's going on there. Oh, except the one on September 11th definitely had something to do with the attacks. 
_________________
brian.prince|light.comp.paint |
|
| Back to top |
|
Drunken Monkey
member
Member #
Joined: 08 Feb 2000
Posts: 1016
Location: mothership
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:25 pm |
|
|
| balistic wrote: |
| Because you'd need an infinite number of random sources in order to eliminate variability. |
| balistic wrote: |
Similar fluctuations appear on different days, and Radin discounts them by simply saying he doesn't know what's going on there. Oh, except the one on September 11th definitely had something to do with the attacks. |
| article wrote: |
| But then on September 6, 1997, something quite extraordinary happened: the graph shot upwards, recording a sudden and massive shift in the number sequence as his machines around the world started reporting huge deviations from the norm |
Its easy to look at one thing at a time and then discount it. All or nothing...
| Quote: |
| Dean's work is included in the Y2K pages. He also made independent assessments of the GCP data associated with September 11 2001, many of which are included in joint publications and presentations, as well as his own publications. |
Okay, so they use his analysis when its not completely out of whack. He sounds cooky. Again, if one of them is wrong at something then they all must be wrong right? I tend to like what Nelson says more, its not conclusive thats clear and he admits it. No one is claiming exact science. But these things do seem to react to world events.. and if you read whole article - to individuals as well.
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud |
|
| Back to top |
|
Impaler
member
Member #
Joined: 02 Dec 1999
Posts: 1560
Location: Albuquerque.NewMexico.USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:54 pm |
|
|
I'm with balistic on this one. The entire concept seems to just be a statistical simulacrum. These scientists are seeing God on their toast, and in doing so are committing a common logical fallacy.
They're confusing cause and correlation. It's one thing to have a big spike right before a major event, but it's another thing to actually show the mechanics behind it. Until they show what's actually CAUSING this, I'm not convinced.
_________________
QED, sort of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
gLitterbug
member
Member #
Joined: 13 Feb 2001
Posts: 1340
Location: Austria
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:21 pm |
|
|
I only read over this fast, but it really inspired me. I think I�ll write a story for a movie, where there is some means of predicting the future. Imagine, you could use that device to prevent bad things from ever happening, like crimes for example. Hopefully my nr. one choice for the lead role won�t turn it down as he is the only one that could star in such a story: Tom Cruise!
All joking aside, regardless if this is something or just bullshit, one thing balistic says is very true and that is that humans are very likely to find things where they like to find them. Be it errors or patterns, for or against something.
I for myself like to keep out of things like this as there is no use in arguing over it. But I would rather see it to be untrue than not, simply because a device that can or at least is thought to predict the future could really do alot of harm. |
|
| Back to top |
|
[Shizo]
member
Member #
Joined: 22 Oct 1999
Posts: 3938
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:04 pm |
|
|
| I think they should make a www.bullshido.com type of website but for general bullshido, you know what i mean? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Drunken Monkey
member
Member #
Joined: 08 Feb 2000
Posts: 1016
Location: mothership
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:19 pm |
|
|
heh. I bet this thing knew BCON was going to jump 30% today!
short term
long term (notice logarithmic scale)
bullshit? i think there is something to it. like i said, article is exagerrated and no one is claiming any proof of anything. all this stuff is theoretical, and its easy to take any one thing and negate the whole just because it doesnt fit into whatever narrow frame you happened to be looking through.
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud |
|
| Back to top |
|
pxy
junior member
Member #
Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 45
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:39 am |
|
|
> the horror of the terrorist attacks
3k people. or what was it? 110 million died from the colonization of america.
_________________
red alert fogger5:04 snake4:43 22khzmono |
|
| Back to top |
|
Impaler
member
Member #
Joined: 02 Dec 1999
Posts: 1560
Location: Albuquerque.NewMexico.USA
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:45 pm |
|
|
| Quote: |
| 3k people. or what was it? 110 million died from the colonization of america. |
FLAMEBAIT
_________________
QED, sort of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Giant Hamster
member
Member #
Joined: 22 Oct 1999
Posts: 1782
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 7:02 pm |
|
|
| 3 Billion people died from the Americanization of your Colon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 7:23 pm |
|
|
| loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool |
|
| Back to top |
|
watmough
member
Member #
Joined: 22 Sep 2003
Posts: 779
Location: Rockland, ME
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 9:58 pm |
|
|
| HAHAHHAHHAA |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:22 am |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
scallywag
member
Member #
Joined: 24 Jul 2003
Posts: 105
Location: Bristol, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 5:03 pm |
|
|
Sanity check:
How many people die every day?
Assume everyone lives to 70 (rough but good enough), assume world population of about 6 billion.
Therefore 6*10^9/(70*365) = 300 000 people die every day (disclaimer: due to dodgy approximations this answer may well be wrong by a factor of 2 to 5).
How about the in US? The US has about 5% of the world population so about 15 000 people die in the US every day. September 11th was unusual, but not freakishly so.
Spend 5 minutes google searching if you don't believe me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Drunken Monkey
member
Member #
Joined: 08 Feb 2000
Posts: 1016
Location: mothership
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 8:28 pm |
|
|
a jelous girl cuts off a penis of her lover and tosses it out of a window of a moving car every time you post in this thread. google it if you dont believe me.
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragnarok
member
Member #
Joined: 12 Nov 2000
Posts: 1085
Location: Navarra, Spain
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 11:36 pm |
|
|
| Quote: |
| One of these new technologies was a humble-looking black box known was a Random Event Generator (REG). This used computer technology to generate two numbers - a one and a zero - in a [n]totally random sequence[/n], rather like an electronic coin-flipper. |
Okay, anybody that now something about algorithms knows that this is impossible. The best we can get is pseudorandom sequences that repeat themselves after long periods of time. GSM works this way with a pattern that repeats every 47 days.
Saying totally random is wrong.
| Quote: |
| The pattern of ones and noughts - 'heads' and 'tails' as it were - could then be printed out as a graph. 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. Any deviation from this equal number shows up as a gently rising curve. |
The "laws of chance" say that after an infinite number of experiments with a coin the total number should equal to 50%, but that doesn't mean that having 150 tails in a row is impossible, it's just very improbable.
Then, if you keep a machine doing this, theorically you should get all the possibilities at least once in the long term. However, having a pseudorandom generating function, you could get one pattern and it will repeat itself after a long time.
_________________
"Ever forward, my darling wind." -Master Yuppa
Seigetsu |
|
| Back to top |
|
balistic
member
Member #
Joined: 01 Jun 2000
Posts: 2599
Location: Reno, NV, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 5:53 am |
|
|
Actually there are true random number generators. They are based on an analog physical source, like a decaying radioactive isotope, or noise in the output of a capacitor. These provide much better randomness than a software-only solution when they are designed properly.
Another penis flung out the window . . .
_________________
brian.prince|light.comp.paint |
|
| Back to top |
|
Capt. Fred
member
Member #
Joined: 21 Dec 2002
Posts: 1425
Location: South England
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:18 am |
|
|
I like the apprent trend in science towards openmindedness insted of the sort of staunch victorian scientist aiming to debunk. I think it's important no to confuse skepticism with being complacent an close minded.
However I think it's safe to say there's by far not enough information here to draw anything conclusive from it. Give it 5 years and see if it's still drawing attention.
scallywag: If those machines react to a collective conciousness, then it's not going to react to a death toll, but to the human response to an event.
It's not the future that the machines read, it's the machine's making the future. Forget Usama Bin Laden (oh, they already have), we need to disconnect those machines before they cuase another world catastrophie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragnarok
member
Member #
Joined: 12 Nov 2000
Posts: 1085
Location: Navarra, Spain
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:32 am |
|
|
| balistic wrote: |
Actually there are true random number generators. They are based on an analog physical source, like a decaying radioactive isotope, or noise in the output of a capacitor. These provide much better randomness than a software-only solution when they are designed properly.
Another penis flung out the window . . . |
That makes sense. I was wrong there, I thought only about it from a mathematical point of view, generating the signal rather than getting one.
_________________
"Ever forward, my darling wind." -Master Yuppa
Seigetsu |
|
| Back to top |
|
Chris
member
Member #
Joined: 22 Oct 1999
Posts: 746
Location: Iowa
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 11:56 am |
|
|
| Quote: |
| How about the in US? The US has about 5% of the world population so about 15 000 people die in the US every day. September 11th was unusual, but not freakishly so. |
I hope you guys aren't justifying the deaths of those ppl.
That's 3k + 15k that died in the US (20% increase of the day). 3k that shouldn't have died. Lots of $ was lost on top of this.
So you have the 15k (70 year olds + the 3k middle age). There was a huge spike of deaths there that don't fit in your equation. Plus you didn't even consider the age difference.
On the article note, it is interesting to read. Especially the part where the guy brought in ppl from random to think of heads/tails and whatever they were thinking it was moving towards. That itself would be worth some research.
_________________
My signature is irrelevant |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ragnarok
member
Member #
Joined: 12 Nov 2000
Posts: 1085
Location: Navarra, Spain
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 07, 2005 12:21 pm |
|
|
| Chris wrote: |
| On the article note, it is interesting to read. Especially the part where the guy brought in ppl from random to think of heads/tails and whatever they were thinking it was moving towards. That itself would be worth some research. |
I read sometime ago that among quantum physicists was the idea that not only the observer affects the quantum experiments, but also the observer's expectatives. Maybe it has some ground, but I haven't heard of any experiment that proves it.
_________________
"Ever forward, my darling wind." -Master Yuppa
Seigetsu |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2005 phpBB Group
|
