A delusional explanation, if in the last paragraph they didn’t mention that people like to bet on beautiful numbers, then this whole explanation could be safely thrown into the trash. The penultimate paragraph is completely superfluous - I got the impression that this explanation was written only to demonstrate their own mathematical skills.
I wonder, those who still doubt the honesty of this lottery, how do they explain the phenomenal number of winners? As "a simple and imperceptible way for anyone" to steal the winnings among "your people"? Seriously?
Well there was a 1 in 29 million chance that those exact numbers fell out by pure coincidence. But that probability would go up if you consider all the relevant lotteries in the world. So somewhere, at some point in time, a lottery would definitely spit out those exact numbers.
All those winners were superstitious gamblers who just bet on the multiples of 9 every time then sounds like a good explanation.
But what about other "beautiful numbers"? Why have we not seen this happen before? That might be a better question to ask ourselves before we start high-roading a guy with a PhD.
Its obviously possible but its so unlikely that it feels rigged. I don't what exactly they were aiming at. But its known that some machines may be rigged with hot and cold balls (I am not very sure tho)
But I read in another thread that there were like more than 4 hundred winners. That's too much. Never experienced something like this before. But I think that may be proof its not rigged. 400 winners can't be exploit/rig/fixing.
It's as likely as any other combination.
It just
feels wrong because of how humans perceive statistics.
For example, if you throw a dice one time and it's a 6, that doesn't change the fact that the next roll has 1/6 chances of being another 6. If there's a second 6 in a row that also doesn't change the fact the next roll still has 1/6 chances of being a 6, but at that moment lots of people would think that it's way less probable to have another 6 than the actual probability, which is 1/6.
I agree with you. Each new roll does not depend on the previous one, so I do not exclude the fact that the combination could well be accidental.
Even if the lottery is run by the government, it makes no sense for them to manipulate the results, because that would lead to a reduction in lottery sales, if not a scandal. Lottery owners make a lot of money even without faking the results. Therefore, I personally think that they are not interested in cheating.
The probability of getting two same rolls in a row is a perspective of a starting point. If you have not rolled the dice yet, then the probability of you getting both rolls with the same number is (1/6)*(1/6) = 1/36 (about 2.77%). The "endpoint" probability is what is important here. I think that might be the thing you guys are confused by. In other words, you could flip a coin and try to get heads 100 times in a row. It would not be as easy as getting heads twice in a row, would it?
