So I have been running some early numbers on my new concept.
It seems that there are NO quantum bunnies lurking, well none that I can find anyway.
But I have discovered a couple of new things:
Although it seems that no quantum bunnies are there it could be a Schrodinger bunny. Is the bunny active / inactive / or both at the same time? Does that state of the bunny change if you try to observe the bunny? It could be that the actual process of trying to observe the bunny changes the state of the bunny?
Having said that my second observation is that whilst it seems that my bunnies are not quantum bunnies they may in fact be phantom bunnies. Best way to describe this is from the Thor movie, yeah not accurate science but the first analogy that came to mind that a lot of people could relate to.
So, Loki the shrewd and mischievous one has the ability to project phantom images of himself, he uses this trait more than once in more than one movie, not that that adds any weight to whether it's a real thing or not. I dare say given current 3D holographic progress a similar thing may already exist in the military arena.
And I think I have phantom bunnies, Loki bunnies if you like. Phantoms of the real bunnies distributed throughout my data and for all intents and purposes appearing to be quantum bunnies that exist in multiple locations at once.
Is anyone's head hurting yet?
I'm not chasing rabbit holes anymore as I have them all mapped out, it's the high tech bunnies that inhabit them that are doing my head in.
So stepping back from the bunnies and quantum and phantom what is going on here?
1. I have found and mapped the pattern of the rabbit holes.
2. I have been able to track a certain number of bunnies who do not enter the phantom zone with around 80% accuracy, sure it's only around 50% of the actual bunnies that pop up but hey that's not bad in my book.
I have a sinking feeling in my gut that I'm missing something bigger here than a lotto game, I have a whisper in my head of what that may be but it scares me to think it out aloud.
If what I am coming to see, well I was going to say proves out but hey I don't exactly know what I'm proving I'm just following a trail of crumbs.
So instead I'll ask a few questions from various references:
1. Is this the real life or is this just fantasy?
2. Do I want to swallow that pill?
From what I'm looking at now it is looking more and more like a deeply embedded structure that is layers deeper than what I have the computing power or grey matter to fully analyse and comprehend.
I have been able to dig only a few layers deep and that has allowed me a much better hit rate on what I was trying to achieve than what I have been able to do with any other method in the past. So it echoes to me that the direction I have taken has been right, the merrits have proven out in my analysis.
So superficially lotto appears random, and according to current random test methods on the analysis of the superficial outcomes gives that result.
But what if it isn't?
What if we finally discover a hidden mechanism(s) that govern the seemingly random outcomes?
I dare to say that if anyone comes to a definitive solution then they have done more than just worked out how to win the lottery.
They will have proof that there is a governing subset of controls or measures that define the outcome of everything, well maybe they wont have an exact algorithm but they will have found a path through the maze that shows the way to the outcome?
And if that is the case where did that come from???
I know mathematicians have been crunching numbers like forever on this subject but what if the answer is not in the superficial numbers that they analyse?
I'm stopping now, I'm starting to scare myself
It's all very large.