• Re: non-random free will

    From Anna@21:1/5 to jillery on Sun Jun 2 04:37:43 2024
    On 6/1/24 4:21 PM, jillery wrote:
    The following is a link to a Veritasium video. It claims that when a statistically large number of people are asked to identify a random
    integer between 1 and 100, their choices are anything but random.
    Instead, the most popular choice is 69 followed by 37. Not only that,
    but multiples of 2, 5 and 10 were chosen much less often, while prime
    numbers were chosen much more often than random chance allows.

    <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6iQrh2TK98>

    The video goes on to provide a running histogram of 200,000 choices
    made in a Reddit survey. It shows how the distribution remained
    remarkably consistent over time.

    These patterns suggest there is something that makes people choose,
    and not choose, numbers not just non-randomly, but selectively,
    without being aware of it.

    The video suggests that most people "feel" prime numbers are more
    random than non-prime numbers, perhaps because there is no exact
    formula for calculating the nth prime number, and also perhaps because
    the real world provides few representations of prime values greater
    than 7.

    So why should 69 and 37 be selected most often? 69 has some cultural associations. As for 37, the following offers a number of
    suggestions:

    <www.thirty-seven.org>

    For those who might ask what this post has to do with evolution vs creationism, I would say it has about as much to do with it as do
    posts about free will.

    --
    To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge


    I like the idea of of 37 and 73 being so popular just because they
    contains no "rounded" digits like even's, 5's, or 10's. And no 1's or
    9's which are too close to the 10's.

    Because that very much makes sense in my mind, 37 is totally random and
    silly. It's sort of cute that so many human's brains might be thinking
    in that same pattern without realizing it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *Hemidactylus*@21:1/5 to William Hyde on Mon Jun 3 00:38:51 2024
    William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:
    jillery wrote:
    The following is a link to a Veritasium video. It claims that when a
    statistically large number of people are asked to identify a random
    integer between 1 and 100, their choices are anything but random.
    Instead, the most popular choice is 69 followed by 37. Not only that,
    but multiples of 2, 5 and 10 were chosen much less often, while prime
    numbers were chosen much more often than random chance allows.

    <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6iQrh2TK98>

    The video goes on to provide a running histogram of 200,000 choices
    made in a Reddit survey. It shows how the distribution remained
    remarkably consistent over time.

    These patterns suggest there is something that makes people choose,
    and not choose, numbers not just non-randomly, but selectively,
    without being aware of it.

    The video suggests that most people "feel" prime numbers are more
    random than non-prime numbers, perhaps because there is no exact
    formula for calculating the nth prime number, and also perhaps because
    the real world provides few representations of prime values greater
    than 7.

    So why should 69 and 37 be selected most often? 69 has some cultural
    associations. As for 37, the following offers a number of
    suggestions:

    <www.thirty-seven.org>

    For those who might ask what this post has to do with evolution vs
    creationism, I would say it has about as much to do with it as do
    posts about free will.


    I would chose 47, as it is the funniest integer.

    I’m torn between Forty Six & 2 mainly because that’s a Tool song. I knew they were quite talented with bizarre time signatures and an awesome
    drummer but only recently learned that their song Lateralus had a basis in
    the Fibonacci sequence.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lateralus_(song)

    https://youtu.be/Y7JG63IuaWs?si=yQh_o7I8Zk4xAst8

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *Hemidactylus*@21:1/5 to Anna on Mon Jun 3 01:08:32 2024
    Anna <tygerbryght@proton.me> wrote:
    On 6/1/24 4:21 PM, jillery wrote:
    The following is a link to a Veritasium video. It claims that when a
    statistically large number of people are asked to identify a random
    integer between 1 and 100, their choices are anything but random.
    Instead, the most popular choice is 69 followed by 37. Not only that,
    but multiples of 2, 5 and 10 were chosen much less often, while prime
    numbers were chosen much more often than random chance allows.

    <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6iQrh2TK98>

    The video goes on to provide a running histogram of 200,000 choices
    made in a Reddit survey. It shows how the distribution remained
    remarkably consistent over time.

    These patterns suggest there is something that makes people choose,
    and not choose, numbers not just non-randomly, but selectively,
    without being aware of it.

    The video suggests that most people "feel" prime numbers are more
    random than non-prime numbers, perhaps because there is no exact
    formula for calculating the nth prime number, and also perhaps because
    the real world provides few representations of prime values greater
    than 7.

    So why should 69 and 37 be selected most often? 69 has some cultural
    associations. As for 37, the following offers a number of
    suggestions:

    <www.thirty-seven.org>

    For those who might ask what this post has to do with evolution vs
    creationism, I would say it has about as much to do with it as do
    posts about free will.

    --
    To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge


    I like the idea of of 37 and 73 being so popular just because they
    contains no "rounded" digits like even's, 5's, or 10's. And no 1's or
    9's which are too close to the 10's.

    Because that very much makes sense in my mind, 37 is totally random and silly. It's sort of cute that so many human's brains might be thinking
    in that same pattern without realizing it.

    34 seems to resonate with me recently…for some reason. Hmmm…

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)