The Difference between Risk & Uncertainty - Poll #1

[Forexmospherian]

Probability theories - All is not black or white maybe

Hi Pat

Mathematicians are like Economists - they don't all agree on so many things ;-)

Probability theories are far for clear - ie

A Brazilian mathematician claims it is possible to predict the results of a lottery draw by applying complicated maths and probability theories.
Renato Gianella has found it is entirely possible to predict numbers which are more likely to appear than others, by following the same behaviour patterns as predicted by the Law of Large Numbers.
His study called The Geometry of Chance: Lotto Numbers Follow a Predicted Pattern, finds not all combinations of numbers have the same probability of occurring – so in short, it is possible to predict patterns of numbers with a greater chance of being drawn.

The mathematician behind the study has created a website which uses colour patterns to show number combinations which are more likely to win the lottery based on previous draws in 20 lotteries from around the world - but you may need more than GCSE maths to decipher the code
The study claims that there is a pattern which is applicable in all lotteries around the world, which can be worked out using a complicated coloured template.
Mr Gianella said ‘Lottery should no longer be seeing as a form of a gambling but a true representation of the probabilistic theory and the Law of Large Numbers.’
It isn’t however as simple as being able to pick the six most likely numbers to win the National Lottery, it is however possible to pick several combinations of numbers which are more likely to be drawn based on probability.

The mathematician has a website www.lotorainbow.com.br/en/default.asp which allows people to view the likelihood of different numbers being drawn in 20 different lotteries around the world - but readers may need a maths degree themselves to understand it.
The maths behind the theory is based on previous draws and patterns which arise from them – previous draws dictate the future probability of certain number being drawn.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ilian-mathematician-claims.html#ixzz3HoFWpvIr


Entirely different from what many other mathematicians would say - ie its a total random separate event every draw - so in theory you could have the same 6 numbers appear - 4 weeks consecutively - the past as no bearing on future draws

If anyone is around in the next few hundred years - we might then no more lol

F

 

[robster970]

I'll go with Fermat, Pascal and Laplace's view of things until somebody of their stature turns up and re-writes it all if you don't mind. The Daily Mail doesn't feature as a credible source of contemporary thinking on probability theory.

As an accountant would you ask my mum about off-balance sheet financing? Capiche?

 

[barjon]

..................As an accountant would you ask my mum about off-balance sheet financing? Capiche?.................

She'd probably make a better stab at it than my damn accountant

 

[Pat Riley]

Probability theories are far for clear - ie

Well now, that’s not quite the situation. No science can ever be considered a closed science, but barring a major reproducible divergence from currently accepted theorem in that space, the old ones are not only the best ones, they’re still the only ones.

Plus. if good ole Renato “has found it is entirely possible to predict numbers which are more likely to appear than others” then he’d not be written papers on the subject. He’s a Brazilian for a start and I like Brazilians, I think they look smart. But I wouldn’t hire one to work out me maths for me. He sounds a bit like the jokers on sites like this that claim to have found the holy grail.

its a total random separate event every draw - so in theory you could have the same 6 numbers appear - 4 weeks consecutively - the past as no bearing on future draws

Depends on what you’re looking at. The odds each week of you getting any given combination is the same, that’s quite true. But the odds of you getting that same combination 4 times when considered as a dependent set of outcomes will provide a probability a little different. I’m sure there’s a statistician here that’ll come along and spell it out proper. Trade2windows seems like a sterling chap in this area.