|
Name dropper!
Nish Nishant wrote: brownie points
ewww! Chupamedias! BrownNoser!
Decrease the belief in God, and you increase the numbers of those who wish to play at being God by being “society’s supervisors,” who deny the existence of divine standards, but are very serious about imposing their own standards on society.-Neal A. Maxwell
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
2⁻¹²², that's just a bit better than my lottery chances. 
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Technically speaking, his title is wrong: 2122 isn't a small number - it's a sodding big number. "1 in 2122" is a small probability.
But I'm guessing he knows that! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Uhm, he had a minus there. 2 to the power of minus 122.
|
|
|
|
|
|
That little space in the exponent looks like a minus sign on my machine, it's some weird-ass unicode U+207B so not surprising that it's unreliable.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like you are on a device/browser that cannot render that character.
|
|
|
|
|
|
where do you see 2122?
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
|
Get a better phone/tablet/browser 
|
|
|
|
|
When you start talking about numbers as small as 2⁻¹²², you have to start looking more closely at the things you thought were zero
2-122 seconds are about 2 millions Plank epochs, after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Between 2⁻¹²² and (2.01)⁻¹²² lie an infinite number of smaller numbers
|
|
|
|
|
But that's true of any two different numbers.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
2^-122 isn't particularly small.... I can easily divide it by 2! 
|
|
|
|
|
I know nothing of its internal workings, so what I'm asking may be common knowledge. In the latest round where the pot is valued at $1.6 billion, how can there be more than one winner? When the MUSL sends out tickets to the 44 participating states, are there potential duplicate tickets? In other words, the winning ticket 4-8-19-27-34 could be found in at least three states' "box" of tickets: Tennessee, Florida, and California? If so, how many other states could have had the same winning number?
- DC
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
You select your own numbers so quite possible that someone else will also select those numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote: You select CAN your own numbers so quite possible that someone else will also select those numbers
FTFY
So therefore it's possible to select the same numbers as someone else, assuming you're not playing random numbers generated by the lottery.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Haha: I think you made it worse!
Kevin Marois wrote: So therefore it's possible to select the same numbers as someone else, assuming you're not playing random numbers generated by the lottery.
Yes and also possible to get the same random set of numbers as someone else though less likely.
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: it's possible to select the same numbers as someone else, assuming you're not playing random numbers generated by the lottery.
I believe it's possible that the "randomly generated" numbers could also "pick" the same numbers as the other people involved who also win.
There can be multiple winners who've all chosen the same winning numbers randomly. 
|
|
|
|
|
Tickets are not pre-printed, put in boxes and distributed to states or ultimately to individuals.
They are printed at the time of purchase. People can choose their own numbers or allow the machine to select "random" numbers. In any given drawing there are potentially many, MANY duplicates.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Ahh, thanks for the clarification. 
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
Which is why sometimes there are no winners and the jackpot grows higher.
They lowered the odds of winning by adding an extra number, which is why we have seen some really high jackpots in recent years. They probably figured they get 10x the sales that way.
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Nishant wrote: They lowered the odds of winning by adding an extra number
AND by increasing the range of the individual numbers.
While this greatly reduced the chances of winning the overall pot, it increased the chances of winning something. See How Powerball manipulated the odds to create a $1.5 billion jackpot - The Washington Post[^]
Decrease the belief in God, and you increase the numbers of those who wish to play at being God by being “society’s supervisors,” who deny the existence of divine standards, but are very serious about imposing their own standards on society.-Neal A. Maxwell
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Nishant wrote: which is why we have seen some really high jackpots in recent years.
They just changed the format last year... it's only been about six months with the new odds.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
