A question of dice -- answer only if you're old enough.

[Nyaricus]

nice try, but the range is 1to49, not 6 to 49.

to get a number in the range of 1 to 49 we take the log7(49)=2. so we can express this with 2 dice (same applies to log10(100) = 2, hence how 2d10 can be used as percentile).
so the actual expression would be (1d7-1)*7+1d7, roll that 6 times to get 6 numbers. of course if each of the 6 has to be different, you would get a different expression for each one.

And yes, you can theoretically do something similar for all non-prime numbers.
for instance a d26 can be expressed as (1d2-1)*13+1d13

Man, did I ever create a monster

In any case, I'd ove to knwo where to purchase a d7.... *whistles*

cheers,
--N (Thanks!)

 

[The Hound]

I have never put money on a lottery, except $1 once in an office pool. It's stupid. I can understand betting money at a Casino, or at the horse track. You don't have much chance of coming out ahead there, either, but at least it can provide a bit of fun. But picking numbers on a piece of paper in a grocery store???

 

[EyeontheMountain]

And, yes, I've sometimes made my contribution to our local education system (school districts get a majority of the lottery income here) after consulting my lucky dice.

The problem of course being that most local governments take an equal or greater amount out of education from the general funds, so education gets nothing more than they got before the advent of lottery.

 

[Agent Oracle]

Unfortunately, in California the range of numbers is 1-56. Obviously makes it difficult to do with a single polyhedral die, and multiple die rolls will skew the number selections away from a flat random curve.

On a side note, I wonder if anyone has ever done a mathematical analysis of the winning numbers and found whether they are truly a random distribution...

percentile. Dump the results of 57+.

 

[CrusaderX]

I play the Deal or No Deal lucky case game on NBC.com, and use a d6 to pick from the six cases.

 

[Zander]

The biggest problem with most of the equations/methods listed here as examples is that any time you add two dice together, you end up with a bell curve of some sort in which certain outcomes are more likely than others.

Wrong, I'm afraid. Most of the equations/methods listed here produce a straight line, not a bell curve. The method given by Contrarian above which is essentially the same approach as babomb's and Nadaka's examples/equations and my Dx=(D[x/y]-1)*y+Dy all produce an equal probability of each outcome occurring.

 

[ssampier]

I don't play games of any sort. 'Tis a foul habit, and the Devil's work.

 

[Thurbane]

(If you're not old enough to legally buy into a lottery, you can't answer this one.)

For those of you who live in a state that offers some sort of lottery ticket system, have you ever picked your numbers by using your gaming dice? ... And rolled them in front of strangers as you filled out the card?

Be honest.

Not a lottery, but I have on horse races.

 

[SWAT]

I have never put money on a lottery, except $1 once in an office pool. It's stupid. I can understand betting money at a Casino, or at the horse track. You don't have much chance of coming out ahead there, either, but at least it can provide a bit of fun. But picking numbers on a piece of paper in a grocery store???

Well, most people don't play "number-picking" lotteries for fun. They play for the "more likely to be hit by lightning" chance of winning a huge cash prize. Televeision commercials show us pictures of people who have won, so surely it isn't impossible...

 

[The Hound]

Well, most people don't play "number-picking" lotteries for fun. They play for the "more likely to be hit by lightning" chance of winning a huge cash prize. Televeision commercials show us pictures of people who have won, so surely it isn't impossible...

And monkeys might fly out their arse clutching $1,000,000 bills. If they took the sometimes quite substantial amounts of money that they spend on lotteries and invest it (ideally in themsleves to advance their education and training), there is a close to 100% chance they'd wind up way ahead of where they are now.