BLog #161--Relative, Not Absolute, Predictability Is Normal, Part 2

Blog #161--Relative, Not Absolute, Predictability Is Normal, Part 2, by Jack Tuttle

This continues a blog begun in part one (http://dreamtime3.wix.com/jacktuttlebook#!Blog-160Relative-Not-Absolute-Predictability-Is-Normal-Part-1/c1q8z/57279fbc0cf2877f1bee908e):

These cycles are not absolutes since this world is balanced by opposite forces which require exceptions to every rule. Professional gamblers are successful because they understand odds. They know they won’t win all the time, even when their intuition is exceptional. But they know they will win more than they lose if they understand the odds of success better than their opponents. Relatively speaking, they will make more money than they lose. They prey on the suckers who rely on wishful thinking and ego greed rather than playing the odds.

In addition, we do not live in a vacuum. While we are going through our individual life cycles, all others are also. Even the best gambler sometimes loses to a lucky streak from an untrained competitor simply because that opponent is on a lucky streak and the gambler is in a down period. Even if we have won or lost multiples of 6 in a row, we may end up seeing our cycles change on numbers other than the usual predictability simply because our opponents, both individually and collectively, have their own streaks going which counteract ours. Thus, we sometimes see changes between 5 and 6 or between 7 and 8 (or their equivalents).

Cycles occur on the mundane and trivial levels in addition to the profound ones. In an effort to demonstrate this phenomenon, I played multiple games of solitaire on my computer over several consecutive days. The computer allows a much faster reshuffle than is possible using playing cards. However, I had to set specific ground rules to get results within a reasonable period of time and to play each game the exact same way so those variables could be made into constants as much as possible.

For instance, I refused to play any game that had fewer than three or more guaranteed plays prior to going through the cards left in my hand after creating the layout. That way, I could win games often enough to prevent boredom or run out of time. Others trying this experiment might prefer to play every hand dealt, and that is fine too, as long as it is done the same way every time. My style of play may be somewhat unique to me, at least within the limiting rules of the game. But as long as I made moves based on the same criteria each game, my own preferences would have less impact on results.

Solitaire is a difficult game to win under any circumstances, but placing these restrictions on my play allowed me to win on occasion. I then recorded the number of games I lost and won, in the order they occurred. Here are the results I obtained: 6 losses, one win, two losses, one win, 18 losses, one win, one loss, one win, 10 losses, one win, 6 losses, one win, 9 losses, two wins. Then 6 losses, one win, 3 losses, one win, 12 losses, one win, 13 losses, two wins, five losses, one win, 6 losses, one win, two losses, one win, 6 losses, one win, 7 losses, two wins, 6 losses, one win, 19 losses, three wins, two losses, one win, 7 losses, one win, 6 losses, one win.

These tendencies continued in a similar way as I proceeded. While naysayers will remain unconvinced, in my mind more cycles ended on numbers compatible with this article’s conclusions than one might expect by chance. I began to anticipate these cycles as their change-points approached, and I was rewarded for those thoughts frequently. Solitaire is a trivial aspect of our lives, but even with it, cycles appear to have significance.

I also counted the number of times I reshuffled the deck of cards without playing the hands. I became aware immediately how often I would find a hand suitable for playing that followed these cycles as well as the number of games I actually played. Gamblers will likely benefit from knowledge of these streaks, but forewarned is forearmed. They should expect occasional discrepancies in predictability. In the long run, they will likely win more than they lose by betting with these cycles than against them.

I am confident our entire lives are destined, both the up and down cycles. But we must understand the reality of occasional reversals of fortune that balance the cycles everyone else around us is experiencing simultaneously. Relatively speaking, multiple cycles will impact our lives, but there are no absolute certainties. We can look back at the end of our lives and recognize these predictable cycles much better than we can notice them while they are occurring.

The fact we can see exceptions to the “rules” of three-dimensional existence allows us to pretend we are not governed by predetermined outcomes. Everyone who objects to the premise of this article will cite these exceptions as proving their point. But if we are honest with ourselves and look at the long-term rather than individual instances, we will see tendencies that repeat themselves predictably. If we find cycles identical to the ones I’ve described happening more often than would occur by chance, we have every right to conclude they are proof of a gentle force moving us where we need to go to fulfill our purpose on Earth.

Everything is relative. The only absolute rule is that everything else is relative and has exceptions. It may take awhile to grasp this and even longer to accept it, but doing so may give us a peace of mind and relative sense of harmony and balance than we couldn’t have by assuming we must somehow force Nature to our whim. That always fails in the end.

http://dreamtime3.wix.com/jacktuttlebook

Comments and questions can be directed to dreamtime@insight-books.com.