Moderated Coin Flipper

[Thermal]

Projection my dear fellow...

You have no idea what a probability distribution means.

I brought it up quite clearly, saying that the 50% line would have been hit many times during the sequence, and even explained to you that it wouldn't be precisely 50% on the flips before or after hitting exactly 50%.

I see you are still snipping out the quotes which are fatal to your stated arguments. You're not fooling anyone. We can still see them, even if you scramble to remove them from your sight and refuse to address them.

 

[Leumas]

Here are the results repeating 10 times, the flip of a coin 10, 100, 1000 and 10,000 times.

[IMGW=300]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_10.png[/IMGW] [IMGW=304]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_100.png[/IMGW]

[IMGW=300]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_1000.png[/IMGW] [IMGW=300]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_10000.png[/IMGW]

 

[Thermal]

Here are the results repeating 10 times, the flip of a coin 10, 100, 1000 and 10,000 times.

[IMGW=300]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_10.png[/IMGW] [IMGW=300]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_100.png[/IMGW]

[IMGW=300]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_1000.png[/IMGW] [IMGW=300]http://godisadeadbeatdad.com/CoinFlipper3/images/CoinFlipper_V3_10000.png[/IMGW]

Still gets closer to a consistent even 50/50 as more trials are done. Still predictable by the average Border Collie. Still dull and uninformative.

 

[Leumas]

I brought it up quite clearly, saying that the 50% line would have been hit many times during the sequence, and even explained to you that it wouldn't be precisely 50% on the flips before or after hitting exactly 50%. ...

Ah... so now you admit that the app is as good as a True Randomness.... ah good...

.... a truly random generator would show hitting the 50/50 line many times each set. ...

Good... thanks for proving the version you used IF YOU USED IT (I do not think you did from the usage tracking numbers) is as good as a "truly random generator".

 

[Leumas]

Still gets closer to a consistent even 50/50 as more trials are done. Still predictable by the average Border Collie. Still dull and uninformative.

Thanks for even more demonstration of lack of understanding of what a probability distribution is.

But... so now you admit that V1 and V2 which are using PRNGs are just as good as the TRNG V3???

If you cannot spot a difference then the PRNG is as random as the TRNG... and thus QED!!!

 

[Thermal]

Ah... so now you admit that the app is as good as a True Randomness.... ah good...

What I "admit" is that it is utterly useless and a fruitless waste of perfectly good DC current.

Good... thanks for proving the version you used IF YOU USED IT (I do not think you did from the usage tracking numbers) is as good as a "truly random generator".

Then we can add not understanding usage tracking numbers to your long list of intellectual shortcomings.

If you were able to understand them, you would see about a minute of constant use a few minutes before my posting. I got delayed by the forum software not allowing me to post my screenshot.

And you sit around tracking users, but you don't engage honestly with the arguments presented? That's weird.

 

[Thermal]

Thanks for even more demonstration of lack of understanding of what a probability distribution is.

But... so now you admit that V1 and V2 which are using PRNGs are just as good as the TRNG V3???

I admit that v1 was so astoundingly stupid that it's creator didn't even understand that a coin can stop on its edge, as rare as that may be, but when factoring in tens of millions of spins, it should be factored (I've seen it happen irl).

I further admit that all versions are also stupid as they provide nothing of value.

If you cannot spot a difference then the PRNG is as random as the TRNG... and thus QED!!!

As usual, you have QEDed nothing but that you snip out and run away from arguments that are fatal to your arguments. I'm bored now. Almost as bored as clicking on the app. See ya around, but check out that movie. It's really good.

 

[Leumas]

Answering the question of whether the real world is deterministic or not is a super task.

You will never finish.

God thumpers take god as the default... and they illogically and irrational demand that one prove that there is no god in order for them to pretend to believe it... and of course they do not because they will always wiggle and wriggle and slither some god-of-gaps or even one that is as good as useless nothing.... just to keep up the hope.

And it is the same with the determinism god... they take that as the default and just bare assert it and demand illogically and irrationally that one prove that determinism is not true... without of course ever feeling the need to prove determinism true in the first place.

Fortunately... unlike the god-claptrap... determinism is falsifiable.

All it takes is ONE example of an indeterministic phenomenon and voila... determinism is disproven.

And this is how easy it is.

And of course science has provided numerous... not just one... such phenomena.

But just like Flat Earthers adamantly and relentlessly refuse to look at the NASA live feed video from the ISS.... so do determinism hawkers.

Randomness is part of the underlying fabric of the universe... not just from science proofs only... but from opening one's eyes and looking around at REALITY.

So it is a very easy task... if it were not for the relentless interminable BLIND FAITH in sky daddies who do not play dice placing a suffocating PALL over the eyes and brains of the determinism hawkers as part and parcel of peddling their gods.



.

 

[Leumas]

Oh, stop acting like an Idiot....

What I "admit" is that it is utterly useless and a fruitless waste of perfectly good DC current.
...
And you sit around tracking users, but you don't engage honestly with the arguments presented? That's weird.

I admit that v1 was so astoundingly stupid that it's creator didn't even understand that a coin can stop on its edge, ....

I further admit that all versions are also stupid as they provide nothing of value. ...

WOW...

Thanks ... really... THANKS so very much for this emotional feedback.

Coming from you it is a 100 times more valuable than praise... because the level of emotions is a tremendous testimonial to the efficacy of the whole OP.... QED!!!

Very much appreciated... QED!!!

 

[Thermal]

ETA: when did you do that test? I am tracking usage of the app and I do not see that the number has increased since yesterday??? Are you sure you did not Photoshop the whole thing?
Not that it matters... you are mistaken as regards to my "premise" anyhow.

Jesus Christ, I screenshot your own app and you accuse me of photoshopping because it gave a result you don't like? Scan the image for layering, the tell tale sign of photoshopping. I'll PM you the full sized screenshot if you like.

And if you claim it shows that the number of users hasn't increased since yesterday, the tracker sucks, of you are bald faced lying. I'm leaning towards the latter based on experience.

Photoshopping. This is the cheapest of cheap argumentation. I seriously can't believe this. I suppose we should be assuming your posts are shopped, too?

Anyone can replicate my trial, should they choose to waste time doing so. Click on the up button to reset to a new number, then click flip. Repeat. In a short time, the even 50 /50 will come up, as anyone with an iota of sense would predict.

 

[Thermal]

WOW...

Thanks ... really... THANKS so very much for this emotional feedback.

Coming from you it is a 100 times more valuable than praise... because the level of emotions is a tremendous testimonial to the efficacy of the whole OP.... QED!!!

Very much appreciated... QED!!!

As usual, you got it all wrong again. It's not emotive; it's annoyance at the level of insult to the forums intelligence that you are so confident you can get away with.

 

[Leumas]

I completely agree. I just want to check whether anything in science actually contradicts it because ... well, fun. I like weird science ficiton.

Science does not need to contradict it... it is not science since it is an unfalsifiable conjecture... so it is already self-debunking all by itself.

But you are right... it has been the basis for many a great movie plot.... I love scifi too... I think watching Star Trek made me hopeful for humanity... unfortunately it is a delusion that there is hope for humanity.

 

[Leumas]

As usual, you got it all wrong again. It's not emotive; it's annoyance at the level of insult to the forums intelligence that you are so confident you can get away with.

Yup... thanks again for even more emotional feedback as a testimonial for the efficacy of the OP.

Chucks man... you do not have to do it all at the same time... try to divvy it out over a few hours... I am swept away with all that affirmation for the OP doing its job perfectly.

QED!!!

 

[Leumas]

Jesus Christ, I screenshot your own app and you accuse me of photoshopping because...

In fact I do apologize....

I looked at your screen shot and you are using V1 not V2.... I assumed you would be using the better version V2.

And yes for V2 the tracking has not increased since yesterday.... but for V1 it has.

So my apologies... my bad for assuming you would use the newer and better PRNG version.

 

[Thermal]

Yup... thanks again for even more emotional feedback as a testimonial for the efficacy of the OP.

Chucks man... you do not have to do it all at the same time... try to divvy it out over a few hours... I am swept away with all that affirmation for the OP doing its job perfectly.

QED!!!

And there we have it folks, in black and white. Leumas admits that the job of the OP was not to discuss a topic, but to get swept away by elicitting emotional reactions. There's a word for that. Begins with a T. Ends with a Rolling.

 

[Thermal]

In fact I do apologize....

I looked at your screen shot and you are using V1 and V2.... I assumed you would be using the better version V2.

And yes for V2 the tracking has not increased since yesterday.... but for V1 it has.

So my apologies... my bad for assuming you would use the newer and better PRNG version.

Fair enough, thank you.

ETA: I used v1 in the context of demonstrating the "precise 50%" claim. The other versions mathematically make this impossible once the first edge land is factored in.

 

[Leumas]

Fair enough, thank you.

I do hope you will play with Coin Flipper 3 which uses a set of TRUE RANDOM numbers generated by HARDWARE from a natural source of randomness (see this post)

I hope this will not be argued against as being anything other than a TRNG based on the "randomness of the natural world".... and thus is arguably better than the cryptographic PRNG I am using in v2 and much better than the one I am using in v1.

Due to the amount of the True Random data obtained from the site you can only go up to 10,000 flips at a time.... not 10,000,000 like in the other versions.

By the way... Coin Flipper 2 uses a cryptographic PRNG which is used to secure very highly sensitive data... and has very stringent specifications for being for all intents and purposes as good as TRNG.... (see this post)

Thanks to psion10 for giving me the link to the TRNG website.

 

[jimbob]

I'm not sure what you mean?

If we're talking about your simulator, there should be a 1 in "really large number" chance that all coin throws turn up heads after a billion tries, otherwise you have a bad simulator.
If we're talking about reality, I don't think there's an infinite number of possible states.

1 in 2^(10^9)

Aka 1 in a really large number

 

[bobdroege7]

God thumpers take god as the default... and they illogically and irrational demand that one prove that there is no god in order for them to pretend to believe it... and of course they do not because they will always wiggle and wriggle and slither some god-of-gaps or even one that is as good as useless nothing.... just to keep up the hope.

Whoaa there, I must have hit your atheist button, hard.

I am as atheistic as they come, although there is no proof there is no god, that's something that can't be done.

And it is the same with the determinism god... they take that as the default and just bare assert it and demand illogically and irrationally that one prove that determinism is not true... without of course ever feeling the need to prove determinism true in the first place.

Fortunately... unlike the god-claptrap... determinism is falsifiable.

Yes determinism is falsifiable, but has it been falsified?

All it takes is ONE example of an indeterministic phenomenon and voila... determinism is disproven.

I am sure you haven't provided one yet, even coin flips can be argued to be deterministic, if you know the position, velocity and what not of the coin, you can determine the outcome.

And this is how easy it is.

And of course science has provided numerous... not just one... such phenomena.

But just like Flat Earthers adamantly and relentlessly refuse to look at the NASA live feed video from the ISS.... so do determinism hawkers.

I am not saying the universe is deterministic, I am saying that question has not been answered yet.

Randomness is part of the underlying fabric of the universe... not just from science proofs only... but from opening one's eyes and looking around at REALITY.

I would like to know how you tell the difference between true randomness and the appearance of randomness.

So it is a very easy task... if it were not for the relentless interminable BLIND FAITH in sky daddies who do not play dice placing a suffocating PALL over the eyes and brains of the determinism hawkers as part and parcel of peddling their gods.

.

There is an Einstein quote you may have heard.
And the retort from Bohr.

And I did not bring the religion, that's your fault.

 

[theprestige]

No it is not converging... it gets close then misses then goes higher then lower and keeps doing that no matter how many times you try....

Look at the running average. The more flips you do, the closer it gets to 50/50. This is exactly what smartcooky predicted. He even stipulated that it would not land on exactly 50/50. Which you and he were both wrong about, it seems.