(April 1, 2016 at 5:42 pm)Stimbo Wrote:(April 1, 2016 at 5:20 pm)AAA Wrote: Look at what I said to Robvalue. Your example is a bad analogy for the same reason.
Ok, let's stick with the lottery example. Rhythm already pointed out that it can go several draws with no winning combination. What do you think the odds become if you only keep the viable numbers, the ones actually picked by the players, and respin the rest? How many spins would you need to generate a jackpot winner?
Now what do you think the odds shrink to if the balls fall according to certain rules emanating from their nature - ie, a 26 will tend to appear only if three odd numbers draw in a row?
I'm not sure we're on the same page. You eventually will then have a 100% chance of generating a jackpot winner, which is what I said at first. I think I'm getting lost in the analogies though, when you say balls falling according to their nature are you talking about chemical properties that may facilitate certain amino acids to bind near each other in a sequence?
