What is being totally random?

(Susefreak) #21

No. There is for instance no randomness is this line:

0 2 9 11 18 20 27 29

What I was talking about was mathematical randomness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness#In_mathematics

(light_sh4v0r) #22

how would you know, it could very well be random, it’s just against the odds.

(XVI the Great) #23

Gossip? Do tell!

(signofzeta) #24

if “playing with yourself” makes you lose 20% of your energy, does it mean that if you “play with yourself” 5 times, that you die? I’m confused.

(WhiteAden) #25

[QUOTE=Susefreak;208997]No. There is for instance no randomness is this line:

0 2 9 11 18 20 27 29

What I was talking about was mathematical randomness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness#In_mathematics[/QUOTE]

+2, +5, +2, +5

h4x!!!

(signofzeta) #26

[QUOTE=WhiteAden;209100]+2, +5, +2, +5

h4x!!![/QUOTE]

1 2 3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37…

now That’s just PRIME.

(Ryan) #27

No, cause when u lose 20% its of your current state.

SO you could go on infinitly :smiley: yeehaa

(light_sh4v0r) #28

[QUOTE=WhiteAden;209100]+2, +5, +2, +5

h4x!!![/QUOTE]

fail :rolleyes:

(signofzeta) #29

[QUOTE=Ryan;209176]No, cause when u lose 20% its of your current state.

SO you could go on infinitly :smiley: yeehaa[/QUOTE]

So if you “play with yourself” 100 times, and I calculated this i a calculator, you’d be around 0.00000002% of energy left. Is there a chance that someone can spend 100% of the 0.00000002%? If so, will that person perish? With that little energy, will that person be in a coma?

You know that show Manswers on Spike TV? Maybe ask them, how many times do you need to “play with yourself” to perish into the afterlife?

(light_sh4v0r) #30

You’re wrong, it’s 0.8^100, which makes ~2.04 *10^-10, which is even less than what you posted :tongue:

(signofzeta) #31

lol, but I’m stating it in percents. So I’m technically right. But either way, you are basically in a coma. First you become tired, then you become blind, then you can’t move, then, I don’t know what happens after that.

(tokamak) #32

Exactly, either you accept that patterns aren’t random, or you accept that ALL patterns can be random.

(Susefreak) #33

Nope. There is room for both to co-exist. Best example: Algorithms
On first sight they appear random, but actually there is some big complex pattern behind it.

So on that you could say that there is a pattern in the randomness while there is also a randomness in the pattern

(signofzeta) #34

[QUOTE=Susefreak;209239]Nope. There is room for both to co-exist. Best example: Algorithms
On first sight they appear random, but actually there is some big complex pattern behind it.

So on that you could say that there is a pattern in the randomness while there is also a randomness in the pattern[/QUOTE]

So I say random stuff, but my life revolve around patterns? Weird.

(light_sh4v0r) #35

Susefreak is being random, can’t keep up.

(Susefreak) #36

Success!!!

(XVI the Great) #37

After you can’t move I suppose you would start playing with yourself in your mind, reimagining your own body and, well, you’ll take your kinky stuff from there.

Edit: What was your infraction for?

(tokamak) #38

[QUOTE=Susefreak;209239]Nope. There is room for both to co-exist. Best example: Algorithms
On first sight they appear random, but actually there is some big complex pattern behind it.

So on that you could say that there is a pattern in the randomness while there is also a randomness in the pattern[/QUOTE]

Still there’s a chance for every ‘line’ being random. Including the patterns you just named.

(signofzeta) #39

[QUOTE=XVI the Great;209373]
Edit: What was your infraction for?[/QUOTE]

Um, I don’t know, a post proving that although almost half of the gaming population is female, Splash Damage still isn’t screwing half the gaming population by not adding female models, because not every female gamer cares enough to be a female character, and not every female even plays FPS games. Then I raged on with random statistics stuff. That post was stating how some people are quick to show that a certain group of people are screwed over, without looking at certain variables with those people first. That was the post that got an infraction for a useless post.

Sometimes we get infractions for something we type it, where the surface meaning is just some random mumble jumble, but the deeper meaning is with the topic of the discussion, like Ryan’s post on Pizza, in which Stroggifier posted a deeper meaning of Ryan’s post.

Sometimes we get infractions for typing in metaphors, personifications, um understatements and overstatements? Um, random things you learn in English Class?

Either way, the thread where those infractions came from is the ultimate thread of randomness now.

(Ryan) #40

The mere thought of u posting about randomness isn’t random anymore but it’s a outcome of the som of previous actions.

There is NO randomness, because EVERYTHING is a reaction.

Thus you can’t even think randomnly, because those “randomn” thoughts are invoked by previous experiences.
The butterfly effect FTW