• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Global Consciousness Project

jzs said:
Your emotional response doesn't do much for me.
Click to expand...
Oh. What will? Should I take my clothes off or something?? Leave my hat on?
jzs said:
The fact is, you won't even look at RNG output, because you say, 'because the GC exists, the RNG output is worthless'. You assume, for the purposes of debunking, that GC exists. Therefore, in your mind, you are justified in dismissing all of the RNG data.
Click to expand...
Would you seriously like me to point out your shabby little lies in this statement? Or shall I expect you to show us them yourself?





No, I guess I'll have to point out your shabby little lies myself.

The fact is, you won't even look at RNG output
Click to expand...
Are you telepathic? If you think so, give it up - you suck at it big time. Making up "facts" is lying, Justin.

because you say, 'because the GC exists...
Click to expand...
I said "IF the GC exists...". Big difference, and another lie on your part, Justin.

the RNG output is worthless
Click to expand...
I said it that it can't be relied on under THESE conditions for THIS purpose (i.e. measuring GC). Lie number three, Justin.

You assume, for the purposes of debunking, that GC exists.
Click to expand...
No, I ALLOW IT TO BE SO for the purposes of ARGUMENT. Lie number four, Justin.

Therefore, in your mind, you are justified in dismissing all of the RNG data.
Click to expand...
Dagnabbit! You got me there! And the more YOU read about how PEAR massage and select and massage and select and massage and select and massage and select and massage and select their data from these "calibrated" RNGs (see the website YOU referenced, it's all in there), the more YOU and everyone else sees what a money-soaked scandal the whole EGG thing is.
 
Donks said:
I'm looking at the data. What exactly is it that an egg outputs? A number between 70 and 120?
Click to expand...
Like 69dodge said, but then you need to: Forget some values as they are "most likely nulls" for various reasons, adjust selected values because one make of RNG produces consistently "wrong" values compared to the other makes, cut some data out because it doesn't fit within expected value ranges, leave out "silly" maxima and minima values, and massage it some more. THEN you can see the magical effect on 9/11! :)

Which means jzs's "calibration rant" is a pointless pile of possum's poo!
 
Zep said:
Like 69dodge said, but then you need to: Forget some values as they are "most likely nulls" for various reasons, adjust selected values because one make of RNG produces consistently "wrong" values compared to the other makes, cut some data out because it doesn't fit within expected value ranges, leave out "silly" maxima and minima values, and massage it some more. THEN you can see the magical effect on 9/11! :)

Which means jzs's "calibration rant" is a pointless pile of possum's poo!
Click to expand...
In that case, too bad. I guess I can't check if the data passes DIEHARD or not.
 
Donks said:
In that case, too bad. I guess I can't check if the data passes DIEHARD or not.
Click to expand...
I'd suggest trying DIEHARD on the this data anyway. I have already downloaded it and looked at a few basic stats myself. If they are indeed raw data, they are quite boringly normal.

I don't think they are raw data though - there's no "nulls" (or at least values that seem to represent null data), which PEAR says is a very visible percentage of the raw data. So already they seem to have "cleansed" the numbers!
 
Zep said:
I'd suggest trying DIEHARD on the this data anyway. I have already downloaded it and looked at a few basic stats myself. If they are indeed raw data, they are quite boringly normal.

I don't think they are raw data though - there's no "nulls" (or at least values that seem to represent null data), which PEAR says is a very visible percentage of the raw data. So already they seem to have "cleansed" the numbers!
Click to expand...
Erm, maybe I'm getting data form the wrong place...
Where do you get the raw data from? I mean the binary string that comes out of the RNGs, with no massaging or filtering.
 
The same place! The one and only place PEAR make it available.

Please don't hesitate to analyse this data - I'd love to know what you find out! As I said, I've done only the most perfunctory analysis so far.
 
Zep said:
The same place! The one and only place PEAR make it available.

Please don't hesitate to analyse this data - I'd love to know what you find out! As I said, I've done only the most perfunctory analysis so far.
Click to expand...
Erm, I'm looking at this page, and the output doesn't seem like raw data to me. I must be missing something.
 
Donks said:
Erm, I'm looking at this page, and the output doesn't seem like raw data to me. I must be missing something.
Click to expand...
That's the place. Yep, they seem to define "raw" as "thoroughly altered and scrubbed".
 
Zep said:
That's the place. Yep, they seem to define "raw" as "thoroughly altered and scrubbed".
Click to expand...
Well, I could massage it some more and get some form that I could feed into DIEHARD, but I don't see how the result would apply to anything anymore :)
 
Zep said:
I'd suggest trying DIEHARD on the this data anyway. I have already downloaded it and looked at a few basic stats myself.
Click to expand...

Feel free to show your work. Even though I apparently have "no grasp of basic mathematics", I think I'd like to see what you do with the data.
 
jzs said:
Feel free to show your work. Even though I apparently have "no grasp of basic mathematics", I think I'd like to see what you do with the data.
Click to expand...
Maybe you can help me with this, where can I find the raw data? I can't run it through DIEHARD if all I have is the number of 1s per 200 bits.
 
rwguinn said:
.
nope- Don't believe it exists, but if it did, it would be affecting the RNG's, which makes any calibration meaningless, since you cannot shield from the effect you are attempting to measure.
Click to expand...


"but if it did, it would be.." etc.

See? Your criticism relies on the hypothesis of it existing.
 
Donks said:
Maybe you can help me with this, where can I find the raw data? I can't run it through DIEHARD if all I have is the number of 1s per 200 bits.
Click to expand...

You'd have to contact the GCP or Orion people I'd imagine. I'm not going to have access to anything that you don't have access to.
 
jzs said:
You'd have to contact the GCP or Orion people I'd imagine. I'm not going to have access to anything that you don't have access to.
Click to expand...
I mailed GCP. Let's see what they reply.

ETA: Well that was fast. No, they don't record the stream. I'd have to get an egg and get the data myself. Anyone has access to an egg and can record the bitstream?
 
jzs said:
Maybe try the Orion folk and see if they can help?
(http://www.randomnumbergenerator.nl/rng/home.html)

I know the RNG's are in general expensive, unfortunately, since they are fairly sophisticated hardware. :(
Click to expand...
Erm, I don't know how to write them an email asking them for a bitstream without begging the question "How about you buy one of our fine RNGs and do all the testing you want?"
 
Donks said:
Erm, I don't know how to write them an email asking them for a bitstream without begging the question "How about you buy one of our fine RNGs and do all the testing you want?"
Click to expand...

Let's just see if I've got this straight. Justin is suggesting that you buy an RNG, run it, collect the data it generates and that will give you an exact copy of the original data obtained by GCP (and what the discussion is all about), and allow you to test the hypotheses generated in relation to it by GCP?
 
Pragmatist said:
Let's just see if I've got this straight. Justin is suggesting that you buy an RNG, run it, collect the data it generates and that will give you an exact copy of the original data obtained by GCP (and what the discussion is all about), and allow you to test the hypotheses generated in relation to it by GCP?
Click to expand...

No Pragmatist. Where did I ever suggest the "exact copy" that you claimed?

I'm suggesting that if he wants to see data in the form of 0's and 1's, he contacts the people involved with the project and/or the RNG makers and sees what they have to say
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom