Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
So, about an eight of the time, or a 2:16 probability of no moving lines.Using that we get to around 14% chance to get hexagram with no moving lines.
Answer 2, most definately.I have to give you two different answers:
I could make a career out of this...Mathematically it is 1 in 64.
jukkodave
As MossElf points out.
Not to mention the many times he calls me 'Harmon'OMG it's worth you being here just for the names. First 'Hairily' now 'MossElf'
OMG it's worth you being here just for the names. First 'Hairily' now 'MossElf'
An elf ? MossElf
:hide:Why didnt you correct me if I was getting it wrong.
It didn't bother me. My name gets misspelled all the time.Why didnt you correct me if I was getting it wrong.
No, I doubt if I could.I have no idea what that means. Could you clarify
I just asked trusty spreadsheet to do this for my journal, and unchanging readings (edited: in my particular journal) are 18.01%, 1,823 out of 10,122 entries of type "Yijing Reading". (Yes, I cast too many readings; yes, we've had this discussion; yes; I've gotten better about it; yes, I still do it sometimes; yes, it's embarrassing.)Odds of one line not changing: 75%.
Odds of two lines not changing: 75% of 75%.
Odds of 3 lines not changing: 75% of 75% of 75%.
And so on to power 6. I'm reliably informed that comes out as 729/4096, which is just under 18%.
What's also fascinating is how Yi manages to agree with theoretical probability in this instance and talk to me meaningfully, that is, give me unchanging readings when I need them.This is where it goes beyond probability. You can calculate the probability of an unchanging reading, or of three unchanging readings in a row. What you can't calculate is the probability of those three readings being all around the same topic, or coming at a time when you most need simplicity, because those things can't be represented in a calculation.
What's also fascinating is how Yi manages to agree with theoretical probability in this instance and talk to me meaningfully, that is, give me unchanging readings when I need them.
That exactly. And yet I bet if you calculated the percentage of times you've received 17.5 > 51 out of all your readings, it would hew to the expected mathematical probability.And just to add another example of how there is no probability involved in our readings:
About five years ago I had a plan.
I asked Yi if it was a good plan and received 17.5.
Six months passed and I procrastinated about starting work on that plan. I asked the exact same question and received 17.5 again. Another six months went by, and for the third time the same reading came for the same question
The 'probability' for that is very very very very very very very very very small. A mathmagician would be as surprised as I was.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).