Alternative Dice by Tony Pryor
May 17th, 2008 9:14 AMYour roll affects the roll of the person who is about to roll. You believe it. If you don't believe it, you come up with a story about what it means. And they do. It is like a roleplaying game but you just make up the story as you go. If you got to, you write stuff down that has happened. Remember the dice rolls affect each other so you is talkin to god or the universe, awright? Or not. Is nature in harmony with timetravel and the will of civilization and your own egoic strength and faith or is dice just fuzzed like that? There could be fuzz.
If you don't believe in pooka magic over ouija boards you may not be a good diceman, or I might be playin you. Can you play it like poker? Can you make it so you don't believe the dice rolls are related? Can you summon the soul of Kolmogorov without annoying him? Okay, maybe not that. There is a japanese girl with snakes for eyes.
1 vote(s)
Terms
manwhat10 comment(s)
I like it. I don't know why 'cause I don't understand it. But I like it.
But I can't vote for it, and I know it is going to get lots of flags.
I can't vote for it because the only random number generator you talk about is dice, and it clearly says to come up with a NEW random number generator, so you didn't really solve the task successfully. Remember, God Does Not Play Dice With The Universe, and neither should you. Not for this task, anyway.
Now, if you showed us the random word generator you used to put that paragraph together, maybe we'd have something to talk about!
Where does the number come from? How is this easy?
yep, you are operating with the assumption that two dice rolls are unrelated, yet dice rolls may be related in a mathematical description of probability such that they give varying odds in relation to the expectations of people thinking about dice in a meaning involved way that is fuzzy to expectations. there is something that happens when people are playing that results in different expectations of the dice results.
if you are a dice player you probably have experienced expectations regarding the results of a roll, particular a sense when you are rolling dice that you are going to get a result or not as you feel it.
if you deny this as having truth you are denying psychic feedback.
When a person plays craps, each die roll means something to them despite the fact that the rule odds are specific. There is a connotation. But if you are playing fuzzy wuzzy you are playing with a different chain of probability expectations. If there is such a thing as animus and a chakra and impeccable timing and a slam dunk that is perfect, dice rolls can be felt.
To create a story between two people and some dice is to affect the beginning of an animus.
If you need an explanation of how the spiritual physics of an animus or chakra can occur, this may transcend your understanding nature and science. Because your assumptions about science rely largely on not seen experiment but canon if you are modern lazy affinatus.
People will throw i-ching, tea leaves, runes, or tarot cards without disbelieving that there may be some reason to expect an interrelationship between material causality and some specific elements of destiny. With a story and some element like dice, which are fun and physical and have some element of the force in 'em, one can play with a Kolmogorov chain or just the next links.
What I am hearing is that it is not believed that dice rolls are differently random depending on who is rolling, and what is expected. I don't believe this to be empirically accurate according to observation of rollers. Real mathematicians do not like to hear Albert parroted unless they are pathologically lazy about realizing that the development quantam mechanics relies upon his work in understanding spacetime. The word relativity connotes a spacetime relationism, and in a crosstime information transcendant milieu, due to the conceptual demands of story reality in time travel and matter manipulation developing in the near to distant future, which is also possibly considerable as now according to physical possibility if there is an interest in history that is respectful of story faith and belief.
If you don't believe that then can tell me you've never felt the energy in a room change? I don't mean that animal on the left is sweating. I mean a quantam tangible which is an animus and contains all persons present as part of it's dynamics, yet is not merely the metadynamic sum of they.
Otherwise spit and count the drops.
Wow, Pryor, lots of big words there. Lots of big ideas. Good ones.
Unfortunately, all I was saying was that the task directions are pretty simple. I "parroted' albert merely as a cute way of pointing out that the directions clearly negate the use of dice... an already well known and popular way of creating random numbers... at all. You shouldn't use dice in this task because you are to create and document a new way of generating those numbers. You neither created nor documented a creation of a new number generating system, which is why you got the big red x.
Wish I could say I didn't warn you.
Well that's the spit. I should have mentioned though, the surfaces are also part of using spit. If you spit on someone, that is going to have different probability than a napkin.
I should add that, theoretically one *could* use dice if one used them in a very unorthodox way (dip them in honey, drop them near an ant hill, take the number of ants on a given die and ignore the number on the face altogether.... or something along similar lines).
I'd love to hear more about the spit as a means of random number generation, though. Resubmit spit and it might work.
This proof has been flagged by 6 of your fellow players (for the benefit of all, flags are anonymous). As such, it has been automatically disapproved. Most likely, they've posted comments explaining why they're displeased. If you think you may be the victim of a bug, injustice, or a gang of Rubins, hit up the contact page.
man what