# 8/1/11

click here: link. image in my text flush right text to wrap around the image on the right please

click here: link. image in my text flush right text to wrap around the image on the right please

G. T. Hushion practiced law part time as a research attorney from 1990 - 2010. He is also an amateur forensic historian. This particular study is of pi and geometric probability and their tortuous journey through the French Revolution. Gaming trials have been used to model randomness and explore pi. It has consumed approximately 50,000 hours over 27 years. He has no interest in gambling other than these scientific circumstances. Prior to law school, he was a journalist and investigative reporter with a special interest in the administration of California’s tidelands.

His other interests include the OK Corral gunfight, the Chumash Painted Cave, and the reality of Sasquatch.

The Western Lawmen and Outlaws Association has characterized his work with the OK Corral as one of the most intensive investigations of the gunfight ever undertaken. His theory of the event is based on original eyewitness testimony and compelling admissible evidence as originally recorded by a Tombstone court stenographer. His conclusions are quite opposite the presentations of movies and the popular myth. He has filmed it twice with detailed analysis and his work has been shown on public television. True West Magazine characterized his presentation and interpretation as credible.

His work with the Chumash Painted Cave identifies it as a map of the area's food resources rather than inexplicable religious signs.

Two years before Dr. Melba Ketchum presented her genome study of Sasquatch DNA and concluded the species was 13,000 years old, Tim had communicated the same conclusion to BFRO and their historian, noted wildlife biologist Dr, Bindernagel. Tim's work does not include a DNA study but is rather based on wide ranging and compelling circumstantial evidence that the species is 13,000 years old.

(His work with Sasquatch grew out of the work with the Painted Cave and an incident of inexplicable rock throwing at the Cave. He has approximately 2,000 bookmarks on the subject with virtually all of them pointing to the effect of extended consumption of excess amino acid growth hormones without balance of the other necessary amino acids. This appears as the circumstance of First Nation people being trapped by volcanic activity on the Eastern slopes of the Cascade range 13,000 years ago. The slopes have the largest and tastiest pine nuts. There would have been many tribal groups of young, strong and healthy people gathering pine nuts during harvest season. Virtually every coastal tribe would have sent their best. There was a chain of massive volcanic explosions 13,000 years ago along the Cascade chain. The Glacier Peak explosion was one of the largest and was at least 5 times more powerful than the 1981 Mt. St. Helen's eruption. If a major explosion occurred during harvest season, many groups would have been killed quickly. Some would have survived ...only to be first trapped for weeks by the volcano, then for months by mountain winter weather. They would have had almost nothing to eat but pine nuts, the inner bark of the pine tree and foxfire fungi which is extensively present around pine tree root systems. Uniquely, all of these have an enormous imbalance of amino acid growth hormones. The effect of extended consumption of growth hormones with dietary imbalance of the other essential amino acids has demonstrably significant genetic impact on DNA. Dramatically, the effects are enhanced and multiplied in the presence of nitrogen and sulfur. These chemicals could have been well provided by volcanic explosions In addition, there was one other available food: the abundant larvae of the pine beetle. It not only also has excess quantities of the growth hormone glutamate, but is unique in all the animal kingdom for the bacteria in its larvae systems: ...they can exchange DNA with a plant! The physical descriptions of Sasquatch from thousands of reports match at least one possible theoretical result ((it would take Nazi-like experiments to prove it)). After months of such diet, new born babies would, by at least some reasonable expectations, arrive big, muscular and hairy ...with these and other significantly modified genetic structures!).

In 2004, the Statistical Laboratory at University California Santa Barbara tested him with 100 flips of a coin. He successfully predicted and found a precise .04166.... flat bet advantage. The Lab then repeated the experiment with 100 “coin flips” from a random number generator. Again he successfully predicted and found a precise .04166.... flat bet advantage.

The experiment was soon repeated with a coin and a reporter. The coins broke dead even despite the prediction. This appears to match the geometry of the underlying prediction (two of three poles of a pi-angle) and a balloon theory of geometric probability ...within geometric probability ...within geometric probability, etc.. Further research obviously awaits this phenomenon.

On March 14, 2006, the Buffalo Evening News published an article in which their reporter tested him with a random number generator. He successfully predicted the precise random outcomes of electronic card turnovers with a .16666 flat-bet advantage.

Five years ago, a Chicago "physicist" attempted to confirm these matters with a random number generator but failed. Unfortunately, the physicist used a pseudo random number generator rather than a true random number generator and couldn't appreciate the difference. He also didn't understand that pseudo RNGs give initial favorable results ...followed by long run failure as the algorithm simply repeats itself. That is exactly what should have been expected. Instead of understanding this, he blamed the pi-odds theory.

The difference between pseudo and true RNG's is distinguished herein. The results with a true random number generator are explosive (see: What's Cracking)!

In the Spring of 2017, Santa Barbara's Independent weekly newspaper initiated a series of experiments with dice using this theory of geometric probability. Two sessions have been completed and more are to follow. To date, including the original throws of this study, 6,000 dice throws have delivered a predictable flat bet advantage closely approaching the predicted .16666.... .

The Cracking Pi Circus Forum is expected to be open for registration within a week. Center Ring will begin with analysis of various roulette databases.

While the term “Quantum Mechanics” is used frequently, it is nowhere near as intimidating as it sounds.

Quantum Mechanics and its scion, Bell’s Theorem, simply predict random particle spin with a .08333 flat bet advantage over traditional random theory and expectations.

The “mechanics” are eighth grade simple. They also need to be taught in tandem with the original Needle.

The only difficult aspect of Quantum Mechanics is the technical difficulty of constructing and operating a particle splitter. It is the “experiment” itself that is difficult, not the actual means of obtaining the advantage.

There is no fundamental difference between using “action at a distance” to predict the spin of a particle …and using “action at a distance” to predict the spin of a roulette wheel or the orbit of a comet.

There is no fundamental difference between predicting the spin of a wheel and predicting the spin of a particle. It is only the Quantum “experiment” that is complicated. To make them comparable, a roulette player would only have to do something arbitrarily complicated (like doing a complicated gymnastics routine) before making and collecting his bet. Under those circumstances, absolutely nothing has changed in regards to the randomness and prediction of the particle or wheel. Only the arbitrary rules of the game are different.The mechanics are identical.

Put another way, only the saddles are different. The horse is the same. Its name is geometric finesse …out of “action at a distance” …and sired by the original Needle.

In the first instance of randomness, these are matters of perception rather than of mathematics. The only “mathematics” involve “1.” and pi and the decimal system.

To what is the value “1.” to be randomly assigned?

Traditional random theory uses quadrature to assign “1.” to the radius of a field.This makes a random flat bet advantage a mathematical impossibility. This is why Quantum physicists cannot reconcile their advantage with traditional random theory: they are using quadrature to record their results and advantage.

The mathematical reconciliation comes through the original Needle. The perceptual problem is that the reconciliation comes with its price of pi. That is, by the proof of the original Needle, everything random is in a world of pi in the first instance. The price of the original Needle is a necessary psychological leap to admit it.

Once the mental jump is admitted, the flat bet advantage becomes clear in the relativity between the geometric divisions of pi.

The gravity bet is the application of “action at a distance” into the organized axes of gaming. As it is applied to the street, the Cracking Pi Circus re-introduces the gravity bet as the “gravity probe.”

The gravity probe uses the same “action at a distance” as the gravity bet, and Bell’s Theorem, and Quantum Mechanics, and Newton/Boskovic’s methodology for predicting the orbits of comets. The gravity probe is intended to be used in circumstances outside gaming. It will be available in everyday life, from psychology to inventories, from health to weather.

The statistics are there, only awaiting examination with “action at a distance.

In reviewing past statistics, the Cracking Pi Circus will help geometric users identify which statistics are appropriate for “action at a distance.” This distinguishes the axis that the original randomness was measuring. This will contrast to the statistical results that were originally concluded by only using averages from Monte Carlo methodology and traditional random theory.

In rewriting random theory, the geometric finesse in “action at a distance” may be fundamentally understood as the mechanics of the game, “leapfrog.”

The person doing the action of jumping from one spot, is using the mechanics of jumping over a person in a second spot in front of him, in order to reach a third spot in the distance beyond them both.

Let the first person be a random event. Let the second person be the COR. The third spot where the jumper lands is the relative pi-angle pole from where he started. This is “action at a distance.”

It is that simple.

In gaming, the geometric finesse is the gravity bet. Depending on the game rules, the gravity bet may or may not need a Bayesian adjustment. For example, American roulette needs no Bayesian adjustment if the dealer is using a random release of the ball. In European and Asian roulette, with a dealer’s regulated release, a Bayesian adjustment is required.

On the street, it is the gravity probe will almost inevitably require a Bayesian adjustment.

The Cracking Pi Circus will fill out the gravity bet in gaming. It will help geometric users explore statistical interests on the street, from actuarial tables to geologic formations, from bio-distributions to commerce.

This breakthrough in random theory will sooner or later generate a significant work force. It will pay for itself many times over by identifying quantum efficiency in all possible directions where randomness comes into play. The Cracking Pi Circus is focused in this direction.

The gravity bet in gaming is the means. The gravity probe in the lab and the street is the goal.

The breakthrough in public acceptance will most likely come from college students challenging their professors with a game of “guess the next card.”

A table game is redefined as a series of random measurements of a pi-angle. Randomness is redefined as only the possibilities of two directions on a pi-angle. Pi is redefined as the Center of Rotation of a randomly measured pi-angle. Each random event in a series is redefined as an event of relative 1/4 pi. Each random event of relative 1/4 pi is changed into 1/6 pi when “action at a distance” is used.

This is what Albert Einstein called “spooky action at a distance.”