Atmospheric noise & fair coin flipping

[gfgs pedo]

hi,

Does a fair coin exist in real world?

Like as according to Allan Turing-an event is defined
by set of  certain parameters governing the event at
that instant.

by redoing the same experiment-do we always have the
same set of parameters that previously defined the
coin.

it is said that atmospheric noise is random but how
can we say for sure.

what if the parameters giverning atmospheric noise
vary frm time 2 time.

may be at a later stage an additional parameter may
govern atmospheric noise or may be a parameter may be
removed,we cant say that for sure.
like the earth & moon attract each other,no 1 knows
why,it is a physical observation & based on it we make
a matahmetical model,what if one day-2 bodies with
mass start repelling each other?
then an extra parameter would govern it & we
will have 2 change the mathametical mode considering
this additional parameter.

so can we say atmospheric noise is random or a coin
flipping is random-only because it passes die hard
test or other randomness tests-which is an indicator
of randomness with the current defenition of
parameters in determing randomness?

is there truly random or that we can say with certain
degre of confidence that they are nearly random as all
current evidence poits so.

Regards Data.



--- 


Jim Choate <ravage at einstein.ssz.com> wrote:
> 
> Perhaps a simpler example. Let's look at a 'fair'
> coin and what that means
> in the real world.
> 
> A normal coin (or any nDx for that matter [1]) for
> short sequences is
> random. In other words if you record a game sequence
> and then replay the
> game the die sequence won't have any statistical
> correlation. Knowing what
> happened last time won't help you this time, the
> 'window of opportunity'
> with respect to statistical bias isn't large enough,
> so the game is
> 'fair'.
> 
> But!, if you throw that coin once a second for a
> billion years you will
> find that -no- coin is really -fair-. This goes back
> to k-sequences and
> Knuth. Go back and then start throwing it again, and
> if your sequence is
> long enough you can use this known bias from the
> first experiment to
> increase your percentage of 'hits' in the second
> sequence. In other words
> you can now prove experimentaly the coin isn't fair
> and what that bias is.
> 
> This is related to 'Hypothesis Testing'. It's rather
> strange, but I happen
> to be rereading a book, "The Mathematical Sciences:
> A Collection of
> Essays" (LoC# 69-12750) put out by some group called
> COSRIMS in about
> 1969. I remember the book because somebody gave it
> to me (I was about 9 or
> 10 at the time) to read, and it has an insane bright
> yellow cover. I
> recently came across it again in a used bookstore
> for $10 so I bought it.
> It's basically a bunch of chapters on various issues
> of math research with
> the intent of focusing high school and undergrads to
> pursue mathematical
> careers by giving examples of what you might be
> working on. The chapter
> "Statistical Inference" (by J. Kiefer) uses an
> example of a coin and a
> 3-run sequence to determine the actual bias of the
> coin (the example is
> very simple, the coin is very biased). You should be
> able to still find
> the book in public libraries and college libraries.
> I'm sure more modern
> texts on hypothesis testing will be just as
> relevant.
> 
> The vast majority of RNG's that we use are really
> PRNG's, we just don't
> collect enough data on them to be able to
> demonstrate that. Or the
> sequence of interest is so short we dont' care.
> 
> [1] A coin is a 1D2, two coins would be 2D2, for
> example. Who said
>     wargaming was worthless ;)
> 
> 
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Mike Rosing wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, gfgs pedo wrote:
> > 
> > > can u pls explain how they have statistical
> > > signatures,pls-
> > >
> > >
> > >  may be using SPN's, i have tried ANSI X9.17 key
> > > generation with GOST-it did have a negligably
> small
> > > skew-it makes me wonder what statistical
> signature
> > > they have.The negligable skew is a weakness but
> not
> > > high enough to compramise the security of the
> key used
> > > from the ANSI x9.17 key gen method.
> > > pls explain.
> > > thank u veru much.
> > >
> > 
> > You're on the right track.  Take several
> encryption algorithms
> > of your choice, then use a fixed IV, and the same
> sets of keys,
> > and encrypt blocks of 0's.  For each algorithm,
> compute several sets of
> > staticstics (a la NIST or DIEHARD).  With 100
> blocks of 10 Megabytes
> > (100 different keys) you should see some
> interesting differences.
> > 
> > Remember, your question originally was "how can
> you tell which algorithm",
> > not "how do you find the key".  Let us know what
> you find out :-)
> > 
> > Patience, persistence, truth,
> > Dr. mike
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>  --
>    
>
____________________________________________________________________
> 
>               When I die, I would like to be born
> again as me.
> 
>                                             Hugh
> Hefner
>      ravage at ssz.com                                 
>        www.ssz.com
>      jchoate at open-forge.org                         
> www.open-forge.org
> 
>    
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com