Comments on: We already knew this

By: Bill Pickett

Bill Pickett — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:11:13 +0000

That is a fine balancing act. All to represent in matter what can be done in an equation in math! ;) :D

By: James

James — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 18:50:54 +0000

Quite the opposite, it seems that the extra material on the one side (since it had the fewest divots) is what cause the extra ones to be rolled. Therefore, casino dice would have to weighted off center to compensate.

By: Bill Pickett

Bill Pickett — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 18:45:35 +0000

Pesky articles. Now, I have to read them after the summaries? ;) Loading the dice is probably done to more exacting standards in a Casino. A complete neutral die I believe is not something that readily exists outside of pure math.

By: James

James — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:25:16 +0000

Though in the article, he was able to get casino dice to roll the “odds”.

By: Bill Pickett

Bill Pickett — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:09:17 +0000

I think the results the scientist received depend on the exact shape of the particular die he use, the air pressure where he was, and the fan across the room. True randomness is a mathematical construct, in a world of actual things there is always bias.