|
I ran into this website and found his Collatz graph.
Had fun playing and modifying this.
His other articles are interesting too for those who enjoy maths. 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm reading a horror story in Braille. Something bad is about to happen ... I can feel it.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Eeeeeek!
What cane happen? Dot's my question, or shudder been.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
They say when you lose one sense other senses become more acute...I smell a rat.
Technician
1. A person that fixes stuff you can't.
2. One who does precision guesswork based on unreliable data provided by those of questionable knowledge.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
with my ears enhanced [by lack of other senses] I heard that's a load of rubbish
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Very touching! 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.
Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
So I have a 56 gallon freshwater aquarium (40" x 30 " x 30") with 13 fish in it.
I was wondering if it is possible to use a camera to generate images, and based on the location of each fish in the tank create an algorithm that can map the locations of each fish to each other fish, in order to create a truly random number, at any given point in time.
I can't see any flaws other than the difficulty creating the algorithm itself.
Do you see any? What do you think?
BTW I already know this is a pretty "fishy" idea.
Aquaman.
|
|
|
|
|
A similar idea from some time back.. Lavarand - Wikipedia[^]
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
I can't see any flaws other than the difficulty creating the algorithm itself. I'm convinced that a lot of disasters began by this reasoning 
More seriously, that is a fun project. Quite advanced though, since it requires spatial recognition and a lot of mathematic stuff regarding randomness. If you come up with something that would make an awesome article.
"Five fruits and vegetables a day? What a joke!
Personally, after the third watermelon, I'm full."
|
|
|
|
|
There are many things that could make this far from random, such as fish preferring one area of the aquarium...fish being evenly dispersed...some fish tending to avoid others...where the bubbler is replenishing the oxygen...where fish can hide...
|
|
|
|
|
You can't reverse engineer his algorithm (hack it). because no one but him has access to the aquarium and the fishes location will not be the same, at any given point in time, per pixel (most likely).
|
|
|
|
|
True, but not being able to reverse engineer something doesn't mean that it's random in the mathematical sense.
|
|
|
|
|
He's right - there's no reason whatsoever to think the location of the fish is random. At the very least, with respect to their nature: those that want to be near or away from others.
Barbs like to school and "pace" back and forth in a region. Some prefer the bottom. Or sucking algae off the glass. External lighting. And, of course, breeding behavior and followup nesting behavior. Maybe chasing after the hatchings for a quick fresh meal.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
location by pixel would be random, especially if he alternated the image size and resolution.
This very scenario (using images of wildlife, life around us) has been the topic of debate and research for years in regards to seeding RNGs.
|
|
|
|
|
In regards to seeding - that's (I suddenly realize) a separate consideration. Seed all you want, but the sequence of values that follows is the primary concern (no?)
I can't see how pixel resolution on non-random behavior will change anything. It might increase the scope of returned values - but will not the found pixels still be clustered where the object are most often found?
Or, looking at this another way: fix locations in the tank and determine if the points are occupied or not. Still will be affected by the living creatures behavior such as feeding tending to more likely interrupt a measured point at the top by the food at certain times.
Any creature that has a behavior (for survival, breeding, etc.) will act in a manner to satisfy that behavior and destroy the randomness.
How do you remove the non-randomness of the (fishes) behavior from the measurements?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: How do you remove the non-randomness of the (fishes)
Narcotics? Lots of caffeine? 
I honestly don't know. I see your point, and raise you an extra steak burrito with chips and salsa. Sorry, its lunch time. 
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote:
Narcotics? Lots of caffeine?
Works for Me!
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: How do you remove the non-randomness of the (fishes) behavior from the measurements?
Lets first see someone recreate the same numbers without having the same fish.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
You seem to have a conceptual problem of distinguishing between random and reproducible.
If all the fish tend to huddle in a single corner it would be hard to reproduce - but the numbers you'd generate would be clustered around that location's value generation.
Thus, if you were using this to run a lottery, one would be wise to bet on numbers generated due to their clustering. However they slosh around in the cluster could make the numbers unpredictable but the tendency for certain values would increase. It could be irreproducable but the generated numbers would not be random over the number space.
You'll have to think this through for yourself - it's hard to express the difference.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: However they slosh around in the cluster could make the numbers unpredictable but the tendency for certain values would increase.
Yes, but not in a predictable way, and you can choose which part of the picture to use - so you could simply cut of the places where they cannot be (like above the waterline).
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Yes, but not in a predictable way, and you can choose which part of the picture to use - so you could simply cut of the places where they cannot be (like above the waterline).
For me "not predictable" is the same "not reproducible" but still not random.
His comment is still valid
W∴ Balboos wrote wrote: You seem to have a conceptual problem of distinguishing between random and reproducible.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Point is that it would be hard for an outsider to recreate the same random number.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that would work. Many scenarios like the one you specified are excellent source initialization for RNGs.
I have seen some that actually get the daily temperature, at given point in time, and add that to the mix too. PC temps have been (still?) used.
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds like a really Cool / hot idea depending on the time of year.
It's always hot in New Orleans
|
|
|
|
|
The only random number generator you'll ever need: xkcd: Random Number[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
