Yes. People who are clever work out the odds of winning the UK lottery as being 1 in 49!/6!/43! = 1 in 13,983,916. So you have to spend £13,983,916 to win the jackpot, which is usually about £5,000,000. The lottery is a tax for the poor at Maths. :-)
Ever thought ...
Sort:
Elroch wrote:
... why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?
I just knew someone was going to post this.
alexholowczak, it's not really a tax on the mathematically inept, because you need to consider how much utility people gain from participating.
Most people who play the lottery don't expect to win. Somewhere in their heart of hearts, they know the odds are against them. But they still play, because they like gambling with small amounts of cash.
I think that lottery is a neat idea. It's like a charitable fundraiser... only the charity is someone rich enough to waste money on lottery tickets.
Mar 23, 2020
0
#7
Mar 23, 2020
0
#8
Nice one!
In other news, over the past 11 years, 999,999 other psychics knew they were going to win the lottery and didn't. 
Mar 23, 2020
0
#9
Elroch wrote:
... why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?
I suppose it's because they always see themselves loosing? (I know they are supposed to be able to predict the winning numbers. I just think seeing themselves as losers is more poetically just.) 
Mar 23, 2020
0
#10
Your figures are made up. You are the one who made yet another one of your assumptions. I Never said you would believe, just that the article existed. In fairness to you the article came after you posted this. But I wonder why you doubt subjects that you make no effort to study. In example it's supposedly the pineal gland responsible for this and there are legitimate scientists who think so. A species of fish has it's eyes connected to it's pineal gland. Things like this are not enough to convince me either but there are no grounds to say impossible by the same token. You show an affinity to majority opinion but nothing more. It is a huge concerted effort on your part to impose your opinion on forums without ever just saying there could be a much larger picture maybe. Your forums depend on nasty vehement deniers to marginalize other opinions. Notice how your claiming ridiculous instead of saying there isn't enough evidence to support it? That is not the scientific formula. For all that you know, it is despite this, absolutely impossible to have a fair and constructive conversation with you. If you judged this of yourself, I would not be judging you. Chess is the perfect example of this fallacy. If there were a 32 man table base, then the majority would discover their movement to be faulty. What cannot be proven with can still be true and what many people think is proven can also be false. There has been talk of psychic ability for thousands of years and it won't just go away with the wave of your hand.
Mar 24, 2020
0
#12
morphyblanca1 wrote:
Your figures are made up. You are the one who made yet another one of your assumptions. I Never said you would believe, just that the article existed. In fairness to you the article came after you posted this.
Yes, over 10 years after. How many lottery tickets do you think are bought by "psychics" worldwide in an average year?
But I wonder why you doubt subjects that you make no effort to study. In example it's supposedly the pineal gland responsible for this and there are legitimate scientists who think so.
No, they really don't.
A species of fish has it's eyes connected to it's pineal gland. Things like this are not enough to convince me either
You surprise me. I would have thought a fish having its eyes connected to its pineal gland would leave no room for doubt.
but there are no grounds to say impossible by the same token.
Que?
You show an affinity to majority opinion but nothing more. It is a huge concerted effort on your part to impose your opinion on forums without ever just saying there could be a much larger picture maybe. Your forums depend on nasty vehement deniers to marginalize other opinions. Notice how your claiming ridiculous instead of saying there isn't enough evidence to support it? That is not the scientific formula. For all that you know, it is despite this, absolutely impossible to have a fair and constructive conversation with you. If you judged this of yourself, I would not be judging you. Chess is the perfect example of this fallacy. If there were a 32 man table base, then the majority would discover their movement to be faulty.
For sure. Seems to have leapt to a different topic though.
What cannot be proven with can still be true and what many people think is proven can also be false. There has been talk of psychic ability for thousands of years and it won't just go away with the wave of your hand.
There has been talk of dragons too. Psychic dragons, however, are just silly.
Mar 24, 2020
0
#14
Elroch congratulations your post has just substantiated my own. I'm now a known psychic because I told you everything you would do and you proceeded to do it despite this."No they really don't" https://www.thecut.com/2018/07/so-are-psychics-real-or-what.html Yes they really do but are ostracized for it. "Yes, over 10 years after. How many lottery tickets do you think are bought by "psychics" worldwide in an average year?" 2 years after it's dated 2011. I have posted 11 years after. There are no statistics to support psychics buying tickets on a large scale. There are a majority of frauds but this doesn't eliminate the possibility. "You surprise me. I would have thought a fish having its eyes connected to its pineal gland would leave no room for doubt." This was believed to be scant evidence of the pineal playing a role in seeing. "Que?" You promote secular scientism not science. "For sure. Seems to have leapt to a different topic though." Meaning that unlike a teapot in space, there is a large percentage of people who think the mind has unproven capability. "There has been talk of dragons too. Psychic dragons, however, are just silly." This is absurd to say as a comparison of something that has been documented wondered about so long. Corrupt and biased theory's are on par with psychic dragons. The correct answer of course is that there is not the instrumentation or control setting to measure such a thing if it exists as it could be involuntary. The way you talk to people makes it much to tedious to bother with. https://www.silive.com/coronavirus/2020/03/did-psychic-sylvia-browne-predict-the-coronavirus-12-years-ago.html something like this is makes it more than a teapot and there are enough predictions like this to warrant investigation. That's unbiased.
Mar 25, 2020
0
#16
... Ever notice that you never see (redacted) and Satan in the same room at the same time?
Coincidence?... YOU be the judge.
[ON EDIT - I had to redact the name of a famous individual when I realized this is "Off Topic", not a discussion group..... It's just as funny if you simply insert the name of someone you don't like]
Mar 25, 2020
0
#17
If a psychic ‘ saw’ a plane was going to crash and he alerted the airline and they cancelled the flight how could the Psychic have ‘seen’ what he ‘saw’?
Mar 25, 2020
0
#18
cnj513 wrote:
Ever thought.... why don't you ever see a baby pigeon?
Mainly because they nest high up on ledges and once they fledge, they're pretty much just pigeons.
Pigeons are "rock doves" who are the descendants of escaped domesticated game birds. They're pretty friendly birds.
Mar 25, 2020
0
#19
lol... I knew that... but I love that gag!
Once when I was young, destitute and ruined, living in a single room, I had the pleasure of watching a pigeon nest just outside my window.
I was my only joy and will never forget it.
... why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?