On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 16:21 -0500, tedd wrote: > At 3:35 PM -0500 12/12/07, Robert Cummings wrote: > >On Wed, 2007-12-12 at 13:16 -0500, tedd wrote: > >> At 10:17 AM -0500 12/12/07, Robert Cummings wrote: > >> > > In my ancient past I worked with a x-ray detector and we simply > >> >> truncated to the tens digit -- that was pretty random. > >> > > >> >Random seeming you mean. As mentioned in the original post, just because > >> >the timeline and sample space is immense doesn't make it random, it just > >> >makes it difficult to guess. In fact, someone already mentioned the case > >> >of computers in casinos that can predict the landing spot of a roulette > >> >ball. > >> > >> Just because someone said it, doesn't mean it's true. > >> > >> I remember in the old days where they used roulette wheels to > >> generate random lists. > > > >Seemingly random lists... We haven't proven random yet ;) > > > >Cheers, > >Rob. > > Yeah, but we haven't proven order yet either. :-) Order exists all around us. I only need to look around me to see the order that exists. A desk, a table, the structure of crystals, etc, etc. Random on the other hand is the one to be proven. I look around and I can also see disorder, but is it random, or is it just messy order. THAT is the question. Cheers, Rob. -- ........................................................... SwarmBuy.com - http://www.swarmbuy.com Leveraging the buying power of the masses! ........................................................... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
