Calling math people

[Superman]

Ok guys, I need some help. My fiance' (who is studying accounting of all things) thinks that we can predict lotto numbers by looking at the frequency of individual numbers that have been drawn in the past. She even came up with a chart that shows which numbers we should pick now using this data of past drawings.

How do I explain to her that trying to predict random numbers is totally impossible? I'm not a math guy, but I do know that these things CANNOT be predicted because the numbers are drawn at random. How can I explain this so she will understand?

[Wicked Pilot]

Make her prove her assertion using something like dice. That way you can show her how wrong she is without losing any money over it.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Ok guys, I need some help. My fiance' (who is studying accounting of all things) thinks that we can predict lotto numbers by looking at the frequency of individual numbers that have been drawn in the past. She even came up with a chart that shows which numbers we should pick now using this data of past drawings.

How do I explain to her that trying to predict random numbers is totally impossible? I'm not a math guy, but I do know that these things CANNOT be predicted because the numbers are drawn at random. How can I explain this so she will understand?

Sure you could predict the numbers drawn. Of course, you'd have to come up with a discriminant function that took into account all the relevant variables that go into influencing how the number is drawn. Of course, such an equation would require humongous amounts of computing power to compute. And such a computer's operating costs wouldn't even be paid for for a few months off the post-tax winnings from a lottery.

[Crown]

She would be right if there was an appreciatable bias to a certain set of numbers. However since AFAIK there isn't such a bias, she is wrong.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

She would be right if there was an appreciatable bias to a certain set of numbers. However since AFAIK there isn't such a bias, she is wrong.

Actually I believe there was a case of such a bias cropping up a few years ago in one state lotto system.

[Crown]

She would be right if there was an appreciatable bias to a certain set of numbers. However since AFAIK there isn't such a bias, she is wrong.

Actually I believe there was a case of such a bias cropping up a few years ago in one state lotto system.

Was the problem identified and rectified?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Was the problem identified and rectified?

IIRC, but I suppose it could have cropped up in another state.

[Crown]

Was the problem identified and rectified?

IIRC, but I suppose it could have cropped up in another state.

Well like I said, if there was an appreciatable bias, then she would be right. The question is can she prove that there is an appreciatable bias that can be exploited? If there is (and by appreciatable I mean consistant and obvious), then she could. If it is marginable, then at best she is guessing intelligently. At worst, kidding herself just as much as all the other suckers.