Hopefully, you have all purchased your MegaMillions (sorry, MegaBillions) draw tonight. EVERYONE was buying them here in NorCal. I bought “a few”, as, after a few years of reading CC, I’m convinced that this is the only way we will be able to afford US higher ed for our children.
Seriously, though, I have some questions about the statistics, math, and engineering (mainly CS) with lotteries. Here are some questions that I have had over the years, and I am hoping someone far better than me in math and science can give some guidance:
Is there ANY possible way to legitimately raise a chance to win besides buying more tickets? I am intrigued by software packages that are being sold that claim to be able to implement algorithms to heighten the chances of a big win. Is that just nonsense?
Are the odds of a winning ticket having all sequential numbers (e.g., 1-2-3-4-5 and 6) vs any numbers in any sequence different. I remember getting into a fun debate at the office, and there were two schools of thought. The first is that the odds are exactly the same for sequential numbers vs. totally non-sequential numbers, and the other camp said there was a huge difference. I tend to side with the second camp, but I simply am not knowledgeable enough to say with any certainty.
I bought a “few” quickpicks. Theoretically, these numbers should be very different with each quickpick. However, I notice several numbers are repeated in the various quickpicks. Like with the winning numbers for a lottery, shouldn’t the quickpicks be random? In others, I shouldn’t be having different quickpicks with the same numbers.
Speaking of quickpicks, does anyone know how these actually work? Are these solely random number generated? Given my experience today, it seems that these numbers are not truly random.
I’ve read recently that the commonly cited comparison statistic to winning the lottery, namely the chance of getting hit by lightning, is not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. Specifically, the criticism is that the getting hit by lightning odds are for a single event (i.e., getting hit by lightning) over the course of a lifetime of, say, 80 years. Buying one ticket for one draw over that same 80 years is not at all the same thing. Again, I am very challenged in this area, and I would love for someone who has a better sense of stats and odds to input.
Are lottery numbers truly random? As far as I can tell, there is SOME small/tiny chance that the numbers picked by drawing a ball have an ever-so-slight chance that there is a difference in a ball (e.g., weight, shape, ink etc) that makes it very, very slightly likely to be drawn. Besides that, is there anything that could affect which number is picked?
I just enjoy the dream of all the good that could be done with so much money. I don’t put any thought into “the system.” My dad always said it was rigged and spent more money than I care to think about into tickets. He literally kept big boxes of losing tickets so if he won he could show the IRS that he didn’t actually win anything (not MegaMillions, but the smaller drawings, though he always had tickets for every drawing). Even as a kid, that made me think and go, um…
So I look at it as $10 for a day or two to dream - an escape much like watching a movie - no return expected.
Someone needs to win so I can quit spending the $10. I only buy tickets when it’s over 400-500 million. And I hope whoever does win spends the money making the planet and some of its humans better off.
A friend of mine told me that two of his brothers (family of 6 kids) have won $1 million in the lottery, a couple of years apart. He said after the second one won, he quit playing because he knew the odds of a 3rd brother winning the lottery were just too remote.
I’m much like creekland. I didn’t buy any tickets until I was around 40. Now I play every once in a blue moon, though I admit it’s become more regular in the last year. But I usually just buy 1-2 tickets. I use it to dream and figure at least I’m helping the Virginia schools.
I have nothing useful to add except to recommend the recent movie “Jerry and Marge go Large”. Stars Bryan Cranston and Annette Bening. Fun watch to keep you entertained while you’re waiting for the $$$ to roll in. I want to say it’s on paramount plus but I’m not positive about that.
That’s not how it works… His odds are exactly the same as they would have been had his brothers not won anything.
The fact that these were two brothers is meaningful to us as humans. However, the odds that the second brother would have one were determined by the rules of the lottery draw, and had nothing to do with the relationship between the two. So the chances that your friend would win after his two brothers was the same as if his two brothers were two strangers.
Most of the money goes to pay the workers and to pay for the prizes.
Unless it is a drawing for an item donates specifically for this purpose, a lot more of your money would go to Virginia schools if you donated it directly to them.
Thanks, @mynameiswhatever ! I read your post and made my son throw $10 away…I mean, buy us 6 tickets! Jackpot, here we come! Though I’d settle for a million.
This would tend to violate an economic principle, in that any initially effective method to improve chances would be quickly discounted in the market. That is, the market itself would change to diminish the value of the method.
With computers, there’s no such thing as a true random number generator. They simulate RNG, but they’re not true RNG. So you can get weirdness, but it’s hard to tell if it’s true weirdness because, well, true RNG also gives weirdness.
With regards to an ordered sequence of something like 1-10, it’s as random as any other number.
The 3 brothers thing is a little more nuanced. It’s like betting on 100 heads in a row when flipping a coin. The odds are quite against the complete sequence at the outset, and yet the odds for the 99th flip after 99 heads are still 50/50. So yes at this point the odds of the 3rd brother winning are just like any other random person. However before the first 2 brothers won, you would say the odds of 3 specific people winning are quite a bit lower than 3 random people from the entire playing population.
This was a common question on my stats tests where we had to give a very carefully worded answer to capture the nuance - you could have the correct numerical answer but the wrong reason, and miss the question. Anyway this was decades ago but that’s my hazy recollection.
Those interested in this sub-topic may want to note that substantial progress has been made in this area by adding information from natural systems. In programs of this type it may be impossible, in fact, to predict the next number in a sequence through the reverse engineering of an algorithm.
