Could "luck" increase probability?

[fadetree]

I say yes, and here's why. There is evidence that dreams can be shared between individuals based on their synapses receptivity to certain electrical impulses.

Such as?

Originally Posted by theaetatus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I see how your interpretation of the First Mover argument could lead to belief in the supernatural, but from there it is a huge leap to believing in the christian god in particular, over all of the other possible gods. Why not Buddha, or Thor, or Mana-Yood-Sushai?

I am an agnostic and do not deny the existence of possible supernatural powers, but I have never seen a rational argument for believing in a particular god over the other possible gods.

Certainly this 'chi' energy is as rational a belief as belief in a god, as both are without evidence or proof. Perhaps chi energy is the force that created the universe?

Yeah...I'm a christian as well, but this is a totally valid point, and has to be dealt with. One way to do so is to claim that God is external to what we call the universe, and as such does not fall within the purview of science, which can only deal with things about observables inside the universe. 'Miracles' by C. S. Lewis has some interesting points about that.

On the whole, I find it very difficult to reject out of hand that such things as 'chi' and so forth exist, while also claiming that Christianity ( or any other religion ) is valid. This is why I just said 'there's no scientific evidence' for these things. Of course, 'believing' in something is often not correlated with actual scientific evidence. Faith, yknow.

But as far as my thoughts and feelings affecting such mundane items as dice rolls and so forth, I don't believe that actually happens. Look at it this way...if it were possible, it would confer such a huge evolutionary advantage that whatever creature learned to manipulate it would rise to total domination in short order...er. wait.

[AexDestroy]

http://www.scientificexploration.org...21_2_mason.pdf

"Conclusion
Our predictions for the meditation data, yogic flying and Vedic observatory
data were significantly supported and were in the predicted direction. Our work
adds to the premise that certain activities that foster transcendental experiences
(Alexander & Langer, 1990; Mason et al, 1997; Orme-Johnson et al., 1988;
Travis et al, 2002) may reflect a more decreasing directional trend (increased
proportion of zeros) in RNG outputs. Alternative explanations do not clearly
account for the observed results. The results were still significant even after
controlling for a possible cumulative drift of the mean from an unknown source.
To our knowledge this is the first experiment with specific predictions for the
direction of a mean shift, and it involves the largest number of synchronized
meditations recorded with a local RNG on site. Having a population doing
a standardized mental technique on a regular basis is advantageous in studying
various aspects of the phenomenon. Further research appears warranted to
explore group meditation as a venue for anomalous results with the RNG. Future
research could test the direction of the results, distance effects from the group,
possible lag or entrainment effects, experimenter effect, non-xoring data
techniques, group size effects, number of RNGs and possible auxiliary factors.
Theoretical questions could include a continued inquiry (Hagelin, 1987; Nader,
2000; Nelson, 2002d; Radin, 2002; Routt, 2005) as to whether or not consciousness
is a causal factor.
What is the possible practical contributions and application of this research? It
is conceivable that RNGs could be used to indicate directional changes in
a proposed global collective consciousness. Just as changes in seismic meters are
used to detect high and low indications of impending earthquakes, RNG outputs
could warn us of changes in collective consciousness while considering any
anticipatory effects. RNGs could also be employed to evaluate preventive and
ameliorative measures that utilize collective consciousness. For example, the
RNG could evaluate the efficacy of various technologies from many traditions,
including group meditations to reduce collective stress in global consciousness
in order to prevent and reduce local and global tragedies.

[astuce999]

Do not try to influence the RNG with luck; that's impossible.

Instead, try only to realize the truth.

There is no spoon!

[rahmani]

Originally Posted by AexDestroy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://www.scientificexploration.org...21_2_mason.pdf

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻

[koros]

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...d=0CJABEPwdMAo

[Lubian]

I'm surprised many of you are breaking out on these random philosophical discussions and even thinking that "theoretical physicists" has anything to do with the computer RNG.

Nearly all computer RNGs are Pseudorandom, they're not really random at all. They generate a specific sequence of numbers based on the initial seed. Knowing the seed, you theoretically even know the set of numbers it will generate ahead of time. The initial seed is usually based on the time.

If coded properly, most programs will use the same RNG for everything (or a specific thread), which is what complicates trying to predict the numbers even if you knew the seed, since an unrelated unknown event could eat one of the sequence numbers for what you're trying to predict.

For a lot of systems (I haven't looked at the eqemu random code) there can be flaws or programming mistakes that make it easy to reverse engineer, predict certain situations that are supposed to be 'random', or make certain situations more likely to occur. There are a few open source emus that make this mistake :/.

Hopefully that answers your question about 'luck'.

[Resheph]

I think one of the more common seeds is the clock

[rahmani]

Originally Posted by Lubian [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm surprised many of you are breaking out on these random philosophical discussions and even thinking that "theoretical physicists" has anything to do with the computer RNG.

What would a theoretical physicist have to do with RNG? Don't tell my boss I should be generating random numbers for her.

Also, as far as I am concerned - this is the only "random" or unpredictable number generator: HotBits, governed by rules that are epistemologically unknowable.

[Slave]

Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one here who has a classical science fiction education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teela_Brown