Happy 11-11!  And now for something completely different…

If you study philosophy, then you are familiar with the collection of beliefs that fall under the label of “Determinism”.  Determinism states that everything in the world is simply cause and effect, and we can predict the future with 100% accuracy if we know the position of every little thing involved.  We just have to apply the math, and calculate the result.  The ability to “make decisions” is simply an illusion - your decisions aren’t an exercise of free-will, they are just the results of all the different chemicals in your head, and electricity bouncing around.

Determinism is anti-intuitive, because when we make decisions, it feels like we are making a choice.  It doesn’t feel like our choice is just a result of the different neurons in our brain, and chemicals pumping through our blood stream.  It feels like we are genuinely making a conscious decision - that we have free-will.

The argument of Free-Will vs. Determinism is a popular amoung philosophers.  I don’t think I’ll be able to solve the riddle with this post, but I do believe that quantum physics provides us with a framework for making the argument for free-will, based on our scientific understanding of reality.

“God does not play dice with the Universe.” - Albert Einstein, arguing in favor of Determinism.

Einstein, like many scientists at the time, believed that reality was deterministic.  He believed that scientists would eventually be able to figure out every math formula for how things work, and given enough knowledge, could calculate the exact future.  What instigated Einstein to make such an argument in the first place, was the Copenhager interpretation of quantum physics, and the Uncertainty principle.

Prior to the discovery of quantum physics, it was hard to make the case for free-will.  Sir Isaac Newton showed us that objects in reality move according to mathmatical formulas.  When you throw a ball in the air, it has a parabolic curve, and we can plot the location of the ball, and predict where it will land.  Sure, there are unknown processes in the world that still needed to be discovered, but it was believed that it was just a matter of time before we had a formula for everything.

The Uncertainty principle changed that.  It’s discovery told us that we could never reach the holy-land of Determinism.  We could never learn all the formulas, and predict the future with 100% accuracy, because reality wouldn’t let us.  Uncertainty wasn’t due to our ignorance - it was hard-coded into reality itself.

While scientists try to remain objective, one couldn’t help but see the philisophical implications.  If Uncertainty is true, then reality isn’t deterministic, and there just might be room for free-will in the laboratory.  If free-will does exist, then it is exercised inside the realm of quantum physics.  And if we have free-will, then consciousness must operate on a quantum level.

Not that many people know that a second Scientific Revolution happened in the 1920’s.  It was during this time that scientists like Einstein, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and others had finally started putting together a deeper understanding of our world on a sub-atomic level.  A lot of important discoveries had been made up until that point, but in 1925, a new scientific field of study had emerged out of equations and experiments: Quantum Physics.

It sure sounds cool!  “Quantum Physics”.  Ooh yeah :-D.  But is this just another inaccessible scientific body of knowledge - only privy to those who understand the jargon of the University professors?  No!  Quantum Physics might sound a little intimidating, but it’s actually pretty easy to gain a basic understanding of what happened in the 1920’s, and how it impacts our understanding of reality.

Prior to this Revolution, humanity had a Newtonian outlook on reality.  This world-view was invented in the 1600’s, by Sir Isaac Newton, and stated that things are basically mechanical.  When you push something, you are putting a force on it.  When you drop something, it falls because the Earth has a gravitational field… pulling objects towards the center.  If you throw something up in the air, it will curve in a parabolic arc - eventually falling back to the ground.  Things accelerate, and move, and everything behaves according to what math tells us.  There is a formula for how everything works.  Reality is just one big machine.

When we started to zoom in on things, we expected to see this same mechanical world.  We zoomed into the cell, and saw miniature machines.  Then zoomed in more, to the molecule, and saw little gears.  Then even more: in 1913, Niels Bohr came up with his famous depiction of the atom:

Marbles!  Brilliant!  Looks like Newton was right - everything is just mechanical.  Everything is just a bunch of complicated machines, working in amazing ways - but still just machines.

It’s important to understand this mindset.  This is the mindset that a lot of people have about reality today.  If you ask someone to draw an atom, they will likely draw the 1913 version above.  The only problem is that it isn’t 1913.  It’s 2008.

The funny thing is… if you zoom in a little bit more… everything seems to just fall apart.  The normal rules about reality - the normal common-sense-Netwonian rules - don’t work.  Not only do they fail, but they fail magnificantly.

This is what an atom looks like in 2008:

What, no marbles?  My goodness… that almost looks as though it’s some sort ball of energy…

So what happened?  What changed our understanding in 1925, that made us re-think everything?

The Uncertainty Principle

Scientists saw those marbles, and thought: “Well gee, if I know exactly where the marble is, and what direction it’s moving in, then I can predict exactly how the atom is going to behave.”

And when they tried to find where the marble was, they couldn’t figure out what direction it was moving in. And when they could figure out the direction, they suddenly couldn’t figure out where it was!  No matter how hard they tried, they couldn’t figure out both pieces of information (location + direction) at the same time.

So what? It sounds like we just need better equipment, right? The Uncertainty Principle changed that - it stated that it’s physically impossible to know both the location and direction at the same time. It’s a law etched into our reality.

Why was this a fantastic deal in the 1920’s? Because the mechanical world that scientists have grown and loved over the previous 300 years was shattered. Things were no longer machines. There was divine Uncertainty, hard-coded into reality itself. And Uncertainty is scary.

This one is pretty good.  I thought it was better than the previous one:

It’s taken me about 18 months, but I’ve finally come full circle with my thoughts about the lottery…

When I first started trying to win the lottery, I believed that I needed to do so through some sort of understanding.  A lottery-nirvana.  This evolved into trying out different techniques related to consciousness.  Altering my belief structures, trancing, precognition, intention manifestation, etc.

As those techniques (mostly) failed, I began to think that science was the way to go.  Think of an experiment, go through the motion, and be done with it.  Plug and chug.  I had turned away from the consciousness-based approach, and thought a more mechanical way would work.  I looked at winning as a result of a series of successful experiments.

The problem with designing and executing experiments was finally realized and expressed in my post, Pseudoscience.  The scientific method can only help us so much… but how do you turn a microscope on itself?

So I return to my first thoughts, with a more robust sense of direction.  There is no mechanical way to win the lottery; from a machine’s perspective, the lottery drawing is a chaotic process.  No amount of formulae can predict the future.  Our destination is a result of decision - not determinism.  The only way to win the lottery is to plug into a decision-making machine: Consciousness.

I’m still at a loss on how I’m going to do this… perhaps that’s why I continue to fail.  I’m trying to find the middle path.  I’m not there yet.

I haven’t posted in over a month.  I had a revelation, which had the effect of removing a lot of my motivation for expressing myself.  In fact, I feel very little drive to make this post… but I feel I should at least get my words on paper for my own sake - and maybe the few reading can provide insight as well.

“Survival of the fitest” describes so much.  I’ve obviously read about evolution before… but it never really hit home until recently.  Everything we see around us is only there because it self-replicates.  The only things that persist are those things that can adapt to their environment, and reproduce.  I’m not just talking about biology - ideas and thoughts are the same way.  In fact, all of life as we know it is a result of self-replication and adaptation.

Now of course, I’ve thought about evolution in the past, and agreed with it mostly.  I’ve known the concept of a “meme” for years.  It’s not like I’m talking about any real new idea here.  It’s just the level of appreciation that’s changed.  In the past, it was an interesting idea that I touched upon every once in a while, that remained in the back of my mind.  But recently it’s been thrusted into the forefront, and become a cornerstone of my understanding of what I experience on a day to day basis.

This actually depressed me for quite a while.  It was like beating a game… yes, it feels great to be done with it, but at the same time it’s a little bittersweet.  I was happy that I understood a lot of my experiences and beliefs… but at the same time, depressed that I could no longer be intellectually honest with myself about holding on to stupid ideas.

My depression was eventually overcome.  My subconscious sorted it out for me.

Self-replication explains nearly everything about our human experience.  On a biological, psychological, and philosophical level.  Self-replication is so powerful because it has persisting power.  Everyone has random thoughts, and does random things… but if those things don’t persist, then in the long run, you really won’t notice them.  They will eventually fizzle out.  For example, how many people believe that the Earth is flat?  Not too many.  The idea isn’t persistent.

I tried to imagine the most persistent thing.  What could adapt and self-replicate the best?  I started listing different organisims in my mind, playing out a long term simulation in my head.  I listed different religions, and my knowledge about how they persisted and adapted to the populace.  Then I thought about just general ideas, and their ability to persist.  Mathematics should persist for a long time… math is considered a universal language.  What else… what else…

Then it hit me: truth.  Truth is the only thing that escapes this need of persistence.  What I mean by that is: gravity will last longer than the human race.  If something is true, then something is true… permanently.  Truth doesn’t adapt… and it doesn’t self-replicate.  The things that do adapt and self-replicate are constantly trying to align themselves with truth - for survival - but truth doesn’t really have that problem.

This removed my depression.  But it also removed my desire to share my thoughts with the world.  Who cares if someone disagrees with me?  And who cares if someone agrees with me?  Truth transcends persistence.  So everything is OK.

In the past I felt a need to get my ideas out… but probably because I was convinced by someone else that it’s good to get your ideas out.  Because they were getting their ideas out - to me.  The idea of “you need to express yourself” is just a self-replicating thought.  If I sit here and preach that everyone needs to get a blog, and tell the world their thoughts… then those who I convince to do so will spread the same idea… telling their readers to get a blog, and tell the world their thoughts.  It doesn’t matter what my line of reasoning is for why people should express themselves… just the more effective the reason is, the more the “express yourself” idea will self-replicate.

But none of that matters now.  Truth trumps all that.  Do I need to convince you that gravity exists?  Uh, no.  A truth will exist whether the conceptualization of that truth is self-replicating or not.  It’s not so much “who gives a shit” as it’s “truth has already won the fight”.

So… with that said… perhaps you can see why I feel no motivation for expressing my thoughts (as much as I used to, at least).

Parapsychology is commonly regarded as pseudoscience - it is attacked for its lack of adherence to the scientific method.  This is a problem - because they are right.

Let’s outline the problem:

We are trying to discover and learn things about reality.  We are seeking genuine, reality-based truth.

What are the problems we need to overcome to do that?  Wild theories from armchair philosophers.  Confirmation bias.  Self-deception.

1. Wild theories are easy - let’s focus on personal experience.  If you haven’t experienced something, then you have no business in trying to make sense of it.  Let’s just throw out the ideas of the world being created on the back of a turtle, since no one actually saw it happen.

2. Confirmation bias is a little harder - let’s develop intelligent tests that can falsify our ideas.  If we develop and execute tests that can disprove our idea, then we can be more sure that our idea is true.

3. Self-deception is tough.  Well, if something happened, then it should be able to happen again.  So, we should tell everyone what we experienced and tested.  If other people reproduce our results, then we can be sure we aren’t deceiving ourselves.  Or at least, if we are deceiving ourselves, then so is everyone else who is seeing the same thing we are.

Sounds like a plan!  Actually, it’s a revolutionary idea that transformed the human race - it’s called the “scientific method”.  Start with personal experience, followed by experiments to try and prove our ideas false, followed by peer-review.

So why don’t we use this for researching the paranormal?  It turns out that’s very hard.  Well… maybe we can simplify things.

What if we just focus on personal experience?  Confirmation bias and self-deception is overrated anyways, so just throw that out the window.  A lot of online communities take this position - including PsiPog (when it was open)!

What happens?  Eventually, the community fails at discovering genuine truth.  When a community’s focus is solely on personal experience, then it rewards confirmation bias and self-deception.

Confirmation bias manifests itself as a bunch of people sitting around, doing nothing.  After all, there’s no need to test anything when you have it all figured out.  The scientific method states that we should be trying to prove our ideas false, in order to avoid confirmation bias.  But if the community throws that idea out the window, then why test anything?  We have it figured out, so there’s no need to do anything.

Self-deception manifests itself as varying levels of delusion.  Did you just blow a hole in someone’s shield?  Better check with the referee!  Awesome, you did!  You are now level 98.  You’ll be flying around and blowing up planets in no time.  Welcome to fluff-ville.

Without dealing with confirmation bias and self-deception, we will forever be doomed to apathetic inactivity and fluff bunnies.

So why can’t we just use the scientific method to research parapsychology?  To answer that, let’s use our imagination for a second.

We need to deal with wild theories, confirmation bias, and self-deception.  We’ve come up with three solutions to these problems, labeled collectively as the “scientific method”.  Is it possible that there exists a property about reality that will naturally “evade” discovery based on the three solutions we’ve provided?  Phrased another way: do the three solutions guarantee that we will discover every truth about reality?  And another way: could a real phenomenon exist that, when the scientific method is applied to it, makes the phenomenon itself go away?

Now, at this point, I’m not saying that these types of “evading phenomenon” exist.  I’m just saying, is it possible that they exist?  The answer has to be: yes!

With that said, I believe parapsychology has become a grab-bag of these such phenomenon.  Telepathy, clairvoyance, psychokinesis, DMILs, OBEs, ghosts, aliens, precognition, etc.  These are all very strange things, that normally wouldn’t be grouped together.  But they share a common thread: they naturally evade discovery when applying the three solutions outlined above.

So, when someone claims that parapsychology is nothing but mere pseudoscience… I have to agree.  Except without the condescending attitude :-).  I believe that parapsychology is, by definition, the collection of phenomenon that, by their very nature, evade discovery when applying the scientific method.  So of course it’s pseudoscience!

Now, after all that, saying something is “pseudoscience” doesn’t mean that it isn’t true.  I definitely believe in telepathy, clairvoyance, psychokinesis, DMILs, OBEs, “ghosts” (in a sense) and precognition, with some curious skepticism for aliens.  The label of “pseudoscience” isn’t an insult.

But just because we are throwing parts of the scientific method out the window, by necessity, doesn’t mean we can just do whatever we want.  In order to ensure our pursuit of truth is legitimate, we must create new solutions for the problem of confirmation bias and self-deception - perhaps on a case-by-case basis.  If the scientific method’s solution to these problems will cause the phenomenon we are studying to naturally “evade” discovery, then we must come up with new solutions.  Not just toss the scientific method out the window and hope things work out.

I’ve analyzed my results from the past 17 months, concerning the lottery.

I devised a way to measure how “close” I get to the winning numbers.  My formula for measuring this “closeness” is somewhat arbitrary, but there is no correct formula, so it works as good as any.  In calculating the odds, I measure the “closeness” of all possible tickets - then see how many tickets are just as “close” as my ticket.

For the curious programmers, you can see my C program for measuring “closeness” here: Lottery Score Calculator Source Code

And for the results of my drawings:

  Date    |   Winning Ticket    |      My Ticket      |Close |    Odds
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Jul 11 08 | 05 14 16 39 51 [34] | 06 13 28 31 50 [33] |  212 | 1 in 14.417
Jul 08 08 | 01 20 22 29 41 [35] | 11 14 25 28 44 [13] |  639 | 1 in  2.637
Jul 08 08 | 01 20 22 29 41 [35] | 08 19 24 33 49 [11] |  710 | 1 in  2.338
Jul 04 08 | 01 03 12 19 20 [28] | 18 20 21 38 40 [19] | 1501 | 1 in  3.430
Jul 01 08 | 01 22 33 43 52 [36] | 09 25 31 41 44 [15] |  586 | 1 in  2.633
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Jun 27 08 | 08 14 22 39 50 [44] | 05 08 12 19 47 [40] |  570 | 1 in  3.329
Jun 13 08 | 08 09 14 38 44 [36] | 09 13 27 30 49 [01] | 1500 | 1 in  1.291
Jun 10 08 | 03 05 15 43 51 [11] | 04 26 29 47 48 [35] | 1239 | 1 in  1.673
Jun 03 08 | 04 19 24 32 54 [05] | 02 31 36 39 44 [25] |  841 | 1 in  2.188
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
May 27 08 | 14 24 32 45 49 [17] | 05 24 30 35 54 [07] |  310 | 1 in  4.717
May 23 08 | 04 08 11 22 30 [04] | 23 29 34 39 40 [14] | 1820 | 1 in  2.000
May 20 08 | 02 14 26 32 41 [32] | 14 29 30 31 41 [09] |  915 | 1 in  1.531
May 16 08 | 06 11 39 46 47 [26] | 11 17 28 48 55 [38] |  394 | 1 in  5.940
May 13 08 | 20 24 27 31 47 [15] | 12 22 32 39 48 [38] |  687 | 1 in  2.346
May 09 08 | 16 31 43 46 56 [22] | 08 29 32 34 50 [25] |  378 | 1 in  6.152
May 06 08 | 04 21 46 53 54 [26] | 18 20 21 45 53 [32] |  923 | 1 in  2.211
May 02 08 | 08 28 37 53 55 [26] | 08 17 20 27 35 [33] | 1535 | 1 in  1.241
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Apr 29 08 | 19 24 35 44 51 [26] | 19 24 34 40 55 [11] |  258 | 1 in  8.194
Apr 29 08 | 19 24 35 44 51 [26] | 19 24 34 40 55 [11] |  258 | 1 in  8.194
Apr 29 08 | 19 24 35 44 51 [26] | 19 24 34 40 55 [11] |  258 | 1 in  8.194
Apr 25 08 | 19 32 37 45 52 [41] | 08 12 13 25 51 [04] | 2867 | 1 in  1.055
Apr 22 08 | 03 22 31 48 54 [09] | 22 27 33 35 39 [06] |  793 | 1 in  2.164
Apr 22 08 | 03 22 31 48 54 [09] | 22 27 33 35 39 [06] |  793 | 1 in  2.164
Apr 18 08 | 24 28 36 50 53 [29] | 10 15 28 37 51 [18] |  723 | 1 in  2.785
Apr 04 08 | 03 05 40 45 49 [17] | 21 22 29 42 50 [10] |  793 | 1 in  2.717
Apr 01 08 | 04 17 26 46 56 [25] | 06 18 29 44 52 [27] |   38 | 1 in 1091.2
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Mar 28 08 | 07 26 27 40 43 [10] | 03 15 37 47 56 [42] | 1479 | 1 in  1.149
Mar 25 08 | 38 42 43 48 53 [12] | 09 13 36 41 42 [02] | 2001 | 1 in  2.405
Mar 21 08 | 05 08 17 19 41 [21] | 05 12 18 23 45 [03] |  373 | 1 in  8.060
Mar 14 08 | 03 12 18 25 52 [21] | 08 17 20 46 55 [24] |  513 | 1 in  3.747
Mar 11 08 | 04 13 35 41 47 [44] | 11 18 22 25 33 [25] | 1056 | 1 in  1.881
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Feb 22 08 | 07 12 13 19 22 [10] | 12 25 39 47 49 [13] | 2392 | 1 in  1.537
Feb 22 08 | 07 12 13 19 22 [10] | 21 22 23 43 49 [19] | 1782 | 1 in  2.249
Feb 22 08 | 07 12 13 19 22 [10] | 06 28 30 36 56 [41] | 2952 | 1 in  1.258
Feb 22 08 | 07 12 13 19 22 [10] | 15 18 44 46 54 [26] | 3070 | 1 in  1.221
Feb 22 08 | 07 12 13 19 22 [10] | 03 20 41 45 47 [28] | 2489 | 1 in  1.473
Feb 19 08 | 01 38 42 55 56 [34] | 02 15 35 43 49 [21] |  941 | 1 in  4.010
Feb 15 08 | 07 11 26 30 53 [14] | 13 14 21 35 44 [15] |  177 | 1 in 21.145
Feb 12 08 | 14 27 39 47 50 [12] | 13 16 27 28 31 [17] | 1013 | 1 in  1.689
Feb 08 08 | 21 30 43 46 50 [18] | 14 18 27 33 55 [09] |  724 | 1 in  2.696
Feb 05 08 | 04 05 17 40 51 [38] | 14 25 44 49 51 [06] | 2334 | 1 in  1.083
Feb 01 08 | 03 14 30 44 56 [05] | 01 16 38 47 55 [07] |   86 | 1 in 140.58
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Jan 29 08 | 08 23 39 40 42 [24] | 12 16 29 30 44 [08] |  525 | 1 in  2.703
Jan 25 08 | 05 12 22 38 56 [22] | 04 05 16 19 54 [27] |  476 | 1 in  3.080
Jan 22 08 | 12 15 22 25 33 [02] | 07 09 18 32 34 [44] | 1891 | 1 in  1.429
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Dec 18 07 | 03 23 46 48 49 [02] | 08 14 22 34 35 [39] | 2443 | 1 in  1.171
Dec 14 07 | 04 07 12 17 30 [44] | 05 17 33 35 46 [21] | 1651 | 1 in  2.677
Dec 11 07 | 06 25 27 30 45 [46] | 10 19 22 26 34 [11] | 1439 | 1 in  1.535
Dec 11 07 | 06 25 27 30 45 [46] | 12 17 31 48 51 [09] | 1845 | 1 in  1.266
Dec 07 07 | 12 18 26 28 51 [35] | 09 11 29 47 50 [04] | 1390 | 1 in  1.172
Dec 04 07 | 16 27 30 45 53 [43] | 04 05 24 32 54 [08] | 2059 | 1 in  1.134
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Nov 27 07 | 09 10 26 29 39 [10] | 03 08 26 35 50 [21] |  318 | 1 in  7.467
Nov 23 07 | 18 21 33 42 56 [11] | 07 18 25 37 46 [40] | 1160 | 1 in  1.423
Nov 02 07 | 01 03 34 49 52 [19] | 08 11 25 29 31 [36] | 1324 | 1 in  1.414
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Oct 30 07 | 02 08 44 46 51 [22] | 09 11 17 50 54 [07] | 1037 | 1 in  1.839
Oct 26 07 | 12 20 24 38 51 [03] | 30 37 41 43 45 [15] | 1107 | 1 in  1.689
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Sep 21 07 | 05 21 23 33 45 [43] | 06 29 32 43 51 [20] |  811 | 1 in  2.244
Sep 18 07 | 20 24 31 34 49 [08] | 14 23 25 31 43 [04] |  134 | 1 in 46.383
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Aug 31 07 | 08 18 22 40 44 [11] | 01 08 10 39 56 [44] | 1527 | 1 in  1.107
Aug 28 07 | 37 40 48 53 56 [44] | 01 04 25 49 50 [21] | 3702 | 1 in  1.358
Aug 24 07 | 04 21 46 51 53 [05] | 21 24 29 47 49 [09] |  635 | 1 in  5.421
Aug 21 07 | 08 38 54 55 56 [02] | 06 22 32 34 40 [33] | 2402 | 1 in  1.804
Aug 17 07 | 02 08 33 38 53 [12] | 16 31 39 45 52 [12] |  811 | 1 in  2.027
Aug 14 07 | 05 08 09 24 34 [17] | 06 08 13 55 56 [03] | 1658 | 1 in  1.595
Aug 10 07 | 10 20 32 33 54 [39] | 21 26 30 37 49 [40] |  203 | 1 in 16.396
Aug 07 07 | 36 41 50 55 56 [09] | 05 13 40 42 51 [04] | 2064 | 1 in  2.895
Aug 03 07 | 16 29 42 46 51 [40] | 01 08 18 24 44 [22] | 2099 | 1 in  1.182
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Jul 31 07 | 05 18 37 39 43 [42] | 09 18 21 37 53 [16] | 1052 | 1 in  1.754
Jul 27 07 | 07 12 35 54 55 [02] | 15 26 33 34 56 [20] |  989 | 1 in  2.880
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 12 32 34 40 43 [10] | 2064 | 1 in  1.237
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 25 32 34 40 43 [10] | 2467 | 1 in  1.135
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 05 12 32 34 43 [10] | 1239 | 1 in  1.883
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 05 25 32 34 43 [10] | 1486 | 1 in  1.574
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 12 32 34 40 43 [36] | 1336 | 1 in  1.744
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 25 32 34 40 43 [36] | 1739 | 1 in  1.383
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 05 12 32 34 43 [36] |  511 | 1 in  5.419
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 05 25 32 34 43 [36] |  758 | 1 in  3.258
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 12 32 34 40 43 [35] | 1339 | 1 in  1.740
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 25 32 34 40 43 [35] | 1742 | 1 in  1.381
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 05 12 32 34 43 [35] |  514 | 1 in  5.380
Jul 06 07 | 03 09 12 25 47 [37] | 05 25 32 34 43 [35] |  761 | 1 in  3.243
Jul 03 07 | 21 35 37 39 40 [35] | 05 14 19 39 40 [08] | 1750 | 1 in  1.266
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Jun 29 07 | 01 17 40 51 52 [07] | 06 14 19 23 24 [14] | 2092 | 1 in  1.154
Jun 26 07 | 04 10 20 29 45 [21] | 06 19 38 40 48 [05] |  795 | 1 in  1.702
Jun 22 07 | 11 14 21 24 31 [23] | 14 22 35 45 51 [37] | 1306 | 1 in  1.504
Jun 19 07 | 05 16 31 49 54 [19] | 02 31 34 41 47 [36] |  645 | 1 in  2.117
Jun 15 07 | 01 05 16 26 30 [21] | 11 15 17 24 33 [45] |  790 | 1 in  3.564
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
May 11 07 | 28 30 33 48 54 [25] | 01 09 30 39 42 [45] | 1804 | 1 in  1.227
May 08 07 | 16 24 41 43 54 [36] | 18 32 43 51 56 [40] |  156 | 1 in 28.644
May 04 07 | 04 09 20 45 55 [34] | 08 09 16 36 41 [12] |  793 | 1 in  2.280
May 04 07 | 04 09 20 45 55 [34] | 06 18 30 50 53 [05] | 1055 | 1 in  1.650
May 01 07 | 11 16 31 52 53 [42] | 03 19 31 37 51 [20] |  786 | 1 in  2.685
May 01 07 | 11 16 31 52 53 [42] | 04 09 17 32 52 [45] |  704 | 1 in  3.070
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Apr 27 07 | 05 07 26 38 56 [15] | 09 32 40 45 47 [29] | 1163 | 1 in  1.353
Apr 27 07 | 05 07 26 38 56 [15] | 14 35 37 42 51 [14] | 1028 | 1 in  1.502
Apr 24 07 | 08 10 35 36 43 [14] | 13 18 35 44 52 [36] |  718 | 1 in  1.976
Apr 24 07 | 08 10 35 36 43 [14] | 01 12 27 30 35 [37] |  746 | 1 in  1.895
Apr 06 07 | 24 32 34 36 39 [06] | 07 18 22 49 53 [05] |  995 | 1 in  2.885
Apr 03 07 | 16 26 33 34 46 [38] | 07 09 23 30 44 [30] |  554 | 1 in  3.162
==========+=====================+=====================+======+=============
Mar 30 07 | 15 23 37 48 53 [22] | 05 10 25 29 43 [39] | 1163 | 1 in  1.280
Mar 27 07 | 18 25 34 35 42 [06] | 13 35 38 42 52 [24] |  614 | 1 in  3.504
Mar 23 07 | 18 21 35 51 53 [36] | 07 18 32 35 51 [14] |  883 | 1 in  2.027
Mar 20 07 | 07 21 46 49 55 [15] | 08 11 21 29 33 [15] | 1610 | 1 in  1.282
Mar 16 07 | 17 25 36 40 43 [09] | 01 05 06 07 08 [03] | 3906 | 1 in  1.000
Mar 16 07 | 17 25 36 40 43 [09] | 02 15 31 49 51 [23] |  691 | 1 in  2.478
Mar 13 07 | 07 11 16 38 49 [35] | 03 19 23 33 34 [31] |  395 | 1 in  4.716

I’ve highlighted three of my best results. Of particular interest is the drawing that scored 1 in 1091. The winning numbers were 04 17 26 46 56 [25], and I picked 06 18 29 44 52 [27]. So close!

As you can see, a lot of my drawings are crap. But it’s those few gems that are so amazingly close, that it’s impossible to ignore.

Alriightttyyy!

Enough of all this bullshit - it’s time to resume training!  I’ve resumed my OBE and EM training, and it feels good to do something :-).  I’ve decided to start holding weekly practice sessions with the geiger counter as well.  Every Sunday, at 7pm EST, feel free to meet in the geiger counter chat room, and we can mess around collectively with the geiger counter.  I’ve added a timer to the page that counts down to the next practice session, so you know exactly when it will happen.

So, see you Sunday!

I feel like such a sucker for thinking so much about the topic of winning the lottery, but I can’t help it - it embodies everything I care about, in a poetic sense.  Perhaps I just use it as an excuse to think about hard topics? ;-P

I was laying in bed, throwing my orange ball up at the ceiling, debating with myself about the morality of winning the lottery.  If I could find a way to win, would it be cheating?  What overall goal am I aiming for, and is this goal moral?  Am I just doing it because I want to escape the rat race of living paycheck to paycheck?  Or is there an honest and healthy reason for my obsession?

I can’t lie to myself… I know that part of me desperately wants to transcend society’s dependence on money.  By winning the jackpot, I will essentially free myself from years of burden and conformity required by society in order to pay for the necessities of life.  But free myself to what end?  What would I do with my time, once liberated?

There is a divine balance to reality.  Any push away from truth creates a perfectly calculated, equal and opposite push towards truth.

If my theories are correct, then society has made a gamble against truth.  Society has taken the stance of “random things happen, and sometimes it’s just coincidence”.  The lottery embodies this assumption by society.

But if the assumption is false - if things happen for a reason, and there is an underlying meaning in everything - then I should be able to win the lottery.  Not for the money - but for the point of demonstrating the falseness of society’s assumption.  After all, who am I to say that I am right, and society is wrong?  What evidence have I presented society with?  As far as society is concerned, I’m just a peebrain with a blog :-).

So, my goal is to demonstrate to society that the assumption of “random things happen, and sometimes it’s just coincidence” is false.  Now maybe I am wrong - maybe society’s assumption is correct.  In which case, I won’t win the lottery, and my failed demonstration can be used as evidence that some things are random.  Of course, that’s not the outcome I believe will come to pass :-), but reality will be the judge of that.

Now - I believe that this goal is moral.  My goal is rooted in revealing truth - whether I’m correct or incorrect.  However, does this answer the question of what to do with the money, once I win?

Yes, I believe it does.  Now that I’ve defined my goal, and my goal is moral, I can more easily see what follows.

After demonstrating that society’s assumption is false, I must spend the money on discovering the truth.  It’s the only moral way to balance out the situation.  I can’t take advantage of society’s ignorance, then disappear with the money to lead a selfish life of abundance.  Once I win, it will become my responsibility to spend the money on restoring balance.

So, let it be known:

If I win the jackpot, then I will use the money to research the topic of both how society allows itself to become deceived, and what the truth actually is.  I will create an organization in order to accomplish this research.  I am announcing this because, in the event that I win, I want to ensure that everyone keeps me honest.  I am human, and I will definitely be tempted to just pack up my bags, and live a peaceful private life.  However, since I know that using society’s ignorance for my own personal gain is immoral, I want to declare my intention publicly.  I will do everything in my power to remain faithful to my word - but, if I start to flake out, then I hope those reading this proclamation will remind me of my obligation.

Oh boy :-P.