John Edser wrote:
>>BOH:-
>>The problem was refuting a random pattern without making any assumptions 
>>about the process.  It's the same question I have been asking for a few 
>>posts. 
> 
> 
>>JE:-
>>Perceptual pattern types are just, defined.
>>Only two most basic pattern types are defined to exist
>>within nature where one type entirely excludes the other, 
>>i.e. no perceived pattern can be both types, simultaneously.
>>These most basic types are: random and non random patterns.
>>A random pattern is refuted when it is a non random
>>pattern and vice versa. 
> 
> 
> BOH:-
> But, to continue to try and get an answer, how do you decide whether a 
> pattern is random or not?
> 
> JE:-
> By definition.
> 
> BOH:-
> To give a concrete example, how would you decide whether the following 
> sequence of 30 numbers is random?
>   2  6  2  1  5  8  1  4  2  3  5  4  6  6  5  5  5  7  4  5  7  4  3 10 
>   6  3  6  7  6  5
> 
> JE:-
> By definition.
> 
Which makes it impossible to refute.

Bob

-- 
Bob O'Hara

Rolf Nevanlinna Institute
P.O. Box 4 (Yliopistonkatu 5)
FIN-00014 University of Helsinki
Finland
Telephone: +358-9-191 23743
Mobile: +358 50 599 0540
Fax:  +358-9-191 22 779
WWW:  http://www.RNI.Helsinki.FI/~boh/
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 12/22/03 3:23:22 PM