Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2004
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2004

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: bimodal distribution in sign of difference of Pi digits]

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg51912] Re: bimodal distribution in sign of difference of Pi digits]
  • From: Bill Rowe <readnewsciv at earthlink.net>
  • Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 01:51:58 -0500 (EST)
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

On 11/3/04 at 1:25 AM, tftn at earthlink.net (Roger Bagula) wrote:

>The point is that Pi is a "benchmark" for randomness. CA 30 just
>isn't good enough to be.

The rule 30 cellular automata has passed every valid test of randomness anyone has propose. That makes it as good as any other well tested pseudo random number generator. That also means, the output of CA 30 could be used as a benchmark to compare other pseudo random number generators to. So, *if* there is a significant difference in the distribution output by Random[Integer, {0,9}] and the distribution of the digits of Pi, that would be strong evidence the digits of Pi are not uniformly distributed. But I emphasize *if*. The code you have posted is not adquate to show there is a significant difference between these two distributions.
--
To reply via email subtract one hundred and four


  • Prev by Date: Re: Problems about Graphics
  • Next by Date: Re: weird page breaks when printing
  • Previous by thread: Re: bimodal distribution in sign of difference of Pi digits]
  • Next by thread: LogListPlot