- Registrado
- 16 de Nov, 2015
Sooooo, @Brad Watson_Miami , now that you are here....you can answer my challenge.
I have repeatedly asked you to use your system to predict something provable; and you have repeatedly failed to do so. Ergo, it is the mathematical equivalent of homeopathy or horoscopes: Something that has been repeatedly proven to be untrue but which still has yet to be abandoned.
So, I'm going to ask you once again: Predict something provable using your hypothesis, or begin repairs on your hypothesis until it CAN predict something provable.
Even better, build a working, functional prototype of a useful technological innovation that uses your hypothesis as its basis, then you will have proven us all wrong.
- and, No, quoting that somebody on TV said "Seven" yesterday doesn't qualify because it isn't relevant and it isn't a prediction, because you didn't tell us about it BEFORE the event.
- and, No, more fairy stories about perfectly 7_4 compliant planets* we can't even perceive don't qualify because that doesn't satisfy the "provable" clause of the challenge.
Here's your chance to prove us all wrong.
Lets start with something small: Tell us what the Powerball # for Wednesday, March 23rd will be. You don't need to give us all the numbers, just the Powerball. C'mon, theres a 1 in 53 chance you'll get it right by accident, lets see if your number magic can even achieve this humble goal.
74 is not a valid Powerball number so the theory can't predict it. It can only predict that the number 74 sometimes appears.