My quantum lottery number generator is feature complete. It still needs a bit of work like working out a few bugs and quality of life.

>added 20 different lotteries to it, as well as custom fields for the user to input their own ranges for numbers
>added multiple different methods of how the numbers are handled from a pure binary state to a lottery number, or any random number. Some of these methods will really crunch numbers like the wave function collapse that will simulate a wave function collapse which is like a bridge between quantum theoretic and reality, and the amount of computation it takes is heavy.
>added several strict tests to determine quantum accuracy, with one of my methods reaching nearly 97% accuracy to an ideal quantum distribution which is very near theoretical limits
>added support for a few different quantum cloud APIs, two of which grab a stream of binary from university quantum computers, and the other generates qubits on command, and default qubit generator is a local Q# simulation.

Here's a quick test of one of the methods that computes quickly. This isn't the most quantum accurate method, but it's a decent one.

>>40825963 (OP)
Ok, does it make you win the lottery?

>>40825963 (OP)
lets me try it anon

>>40826092
There's infinite quantum universes, so yes, you'll win the lottery infinite times.

>>40825963 (OP)
my dad plays it twice a day for 20 years lets give him some numbers I dont have a birthday present for him

I ran up a $1.5k bill generating lottery numbers on Microsoft's Azure Quantum. It was generating off of IONQ Aria, the most advanced quantum computer in the world with a 25 qubit system.

>>40826119
If you want lottery numbers email me at clownpeace@waifu.club. If I give this program out it'll get public access to quantum computing APIs shut down from people overwhelming the computers.

Hehe hoho haha...
Dem bugs will get ya...
Bugs man there everywhere...
On the skin...
Under the skin...
Crawling over the brain...
Can hear them scratching...
Behind the eyes...
Sorry wot we finger bashing about...
Oh that's right...
The stupid man tax...

>>40826166
Nah i dont believe that you believing one of your brain cells or whatever counts as quantum computing

>>40826166
>>40826119
Or tell me your email and what you want and I'll email them to you. You don't want anyone having your numbers

>>40826246
This isn't my brain. Every number that passes through my program can be verified.

>>40826247
godspeed you schizo.

>>40826256
i dont have the thread link dont care to look it up but you basically said your quantum computer is based on your own thoughts.

>>40826256
you cant claim to have a quantum number whatever generator without having somthing quantum related to its generation.You gave away your idea in a no to exact phrase "a neuron in my brain"

>>40826635
likening it to a quantum bit

See this? It's 4000 qubits directly from a quantum computer at a university.

My program takes these qubits, fetched from a quantum computer, and converts them to integers within range of a lottery, like 1-80. It has nothing to do with my brain.

>>40826705
>>40826635

>>40826635
And this is what you're referring to. That wasn't me. It's someone that has the exact same writing style as you do that said that. I never said anything about my brain. This person writes nothing like me.

These are real quantum numbers. You can't pretend they aren't

I'm wrapping up more bug fixes with the program. None of the bugs affect the reliability of the quantum accuracy, though. I'd say I'm 95% done with everything.

>>40825963 (OP)
Is this python for the backend (flask) or both (django) ?
>>40826769
Sometimes cloud compute for quantum is actually just a simulation and not actual quantum compute.

>>40827606
>Is this python for the backend (flask) or both (django) ?
Python and Q#
>Sometimes cloud compute for quantum is actually just a simulation and not actual quantum compute.
I know. I have three different APIs configured for it, and a lot of the cloud computing services let you coose between real hardware and simulator. All three of my APIs are configured for real quantum hardware

>>40825963 (OP)
How does quantum mechanics help determine the lottery?

>>40825963 (OP)
Sent you an email message from the chucruto[at]hotmail.com account asking for five combinations, ¿did you receive it?

So um explain how a random string of quantumly-generated numbers translates to those numbers being lottery-winning numbers from alternate universes, which is ostensibly your angle her?

Bump

awaiting my quantum numbers

>>40829648
>So um explain how a random string of quantumly-generated numbers translates to those numbers being lottery-winning numbers from alternate universes, which is ostensibly your angle her?
It doesn't.
Basically, if you win the lottery in n number of alternate universes, it doesn't matter what numbers you picked, only that they matched, so using these or using other numbers makes no difference, the number of universes where you win remain the same.

>>40831469
Please do not forget about the email message from chucruto[at]hotmail.com

>>40825963 (OP)
Can you use this to predict anything random or just lotteries? If I came up with a random large number, could your system guess it with the quantum algorithm? Can you predict card games?

>>40829333
Waiting.

>>40826166
>clownpiece waifu
Based man of culture and higher learning. I believe your program works.

>>40833616
Me too, but bro does not answer the email.

>>40825963 (OP)
Why do you keep making this thread?
It’s fucking boring.
Random numbers are random. It doesn’t matter how you generate them as if you have done your job right they are random and therefore no better than any other random generation.

>>40833803
retard he just gave your email to the cambodian scam centers

>>40827738
I see. This is cool but not sure how this is /x/ or really how this does anything for any anon, but cool nonetheless. Good job.

>>40831469
>It doesn't.
Sure. But when you're riding the bus to buy another powerball ticket, you know in your heart that your losing numbers are true random picks. Thus separating yourself from the other unwashed, slack jawed imbeciles who let the state's computer pick not truly random numbers for them or worse yet, use their loved ones birthdays, or their favorite player' jersey #. Fucking losers...

>>40834159
>my random numbers are better than your random numbers
Interesting,

I'll send lottery numbers later today

>>40834058
¿How could they scam me through an email account?, is as simple as not giving them money if they ask for it.

>>40825963 (OP)
>>40832258
OP why post if you don’t want to discuss the thing? Just to show off how retarded you are? What are the capabilities and limitations of your system?

>>40836122
I added some features to the program, like new methods of handling the qubit binaries.

>>40835902
I was busy yesterday.

>>40829333
I'll email you soon

>>>40835902
My program can roll simulated qubits, and real qubits from quantum computers. The limitations are in the conversion from binary to a limited range of integers typically 1 to around 100, more or less. Most individual lottery numbers will fall between 6 to 7 qubits. And that itself is the limitation. It falls between 6 to 7 qubits. There is no such thing as 6.5 qubits. In programming, floats (decimal numbers) are an approximation. That means there are left over bits, and those left over bits are used to generate the next number, but at the end of the lottery number there is still typically a few left over qubits. If those qubits were accepted they'd generate integers outside of the range of the lottery so they have to be thrown away. Some of the methods I use deal with this problem, like bit recycling that doesn't waste any qubits, but bit recycling is introducing a classical bias. So I have other methods that are truly quantum, with no classical transformation but those methods throw away the most qubits. So there's many options but they all have trade offs. All computing at the binary level deals with this problem.

There's a limitation to everything unless the lottery you're drawing for ends exactly with its largest integer being 6 or 7 bits.

>>40836154
Still random so no better or worse than any other ramdom.
Pointless.

>>40836210
No, my lottery numbers are much more random than any other RNG you would use to generate lottery numbers. If I were use a PRNG Quick Pick it would fail my tests.

With randomness, there are many ideals that can be measured statistically to determine how randomness a series of numbers is, and the more numbers that are tested the closer the margin of error is. 10,000 numbers, margin of error is around 1%, and 100,000 the margin of error is a small fraction. It's all statistically verified, and my program runs these tests.
>>40826075

>>40836292
Ok let’s say it’s amazingly more random
So random in fact that it is scary random
Like the most random thing of all time,
That means it cannot correlate with the winning lottery numbers and is therefore useless.
Because it’s random.

>>40836316
It's all chance but it's possible, and confidence in the numbers is important to a lot of people. Some people like me have more confidence in numbers manifested by machines that harness the fluctuations of subatomic particles, with information encoded in qubits that can exist in multiple states at once, entangle across space, and collapse unpredictably just by being observed.

>>40836403
You are a larper.
There’s no confidence in random numbers that do not correlate with your intended result which is winning the lottery.

>>40831469
So you're spending $1500 USD to generate random numbers knowing full well that they're useless and basically just novelties?
Why even link this to the lottery at all lol

Sorry, I'm being rude?
Enjoy your quantum numbers, king...

>>40836495
He can’t enjoy them. They are entangled in misery.

>>40834159
>But when you're riding the bus to buy another powerball ticket, you know in your heart that your losing numbers are true random picks
Suppose that instead of doing what they do, the people running the lotteries used your software to create the random numbers.
Your claim would be that this would generate a lot of universes where each people buying a ticket would win it, because the numbers are truly random.
See the problem?
If they used quantum random numbers we'd not see more winners, so no more winners are perceived in a reality where they are picking quantum random numbers from this side.
The whole point of the many worlds interpretation is that they already include a version of reality where any of those people buying a number won, having them pick a quantum number does not increase these universes, because, since it's about matching, the numbers where the quantum numbers didn't win increase to an amount where all winning and losing universes are the same.
You may have going to pick the winning numbers, but used the quantum ones instead, and lost.

>>40836154
Thanks for the numbers, bro

>>40836154
>My program can roll simulated qubits, and real qubits from quantum computers. The limitations are in the conversion from binary to a limited range of integers typically 1 to around 100, more or less. Most individual lottery numbers will fall between 6 to 7 qubits. And that itself is the limitation. It falls between 6 to 7 qubits. There is no such thing as 6.5 qubits. In programming, floats (decimal numbers) are an approximation. That means there are left over bits, and those left over bits are used to generate the next number, but at the end of the lottery number there is still typically a few left over qubits. If those qubits were accepted they'd generate integers outside of the range of the lottery so they have to be thrown away.
No, they don't.
Pseudorandom number generators have already tackled all these problems decades ago, with algorithms that can pass any test and be indistinguishable form really random ones.
So you're reinventing the wheel and I'm not sure you're doing better than Random.org.

>>40836489
I'm not OP, I'm exposing OP.

>>40836403
I hop you can see the problem with the thought method.
Randomness is about unpredictability, numbers so random nobody can see them coming.
Nobody can predict them.
Nobody can come up with a method that comes up with the same numbers.
And this includes the lottery, so they'll never match, you've created a machine that tells you what numbers to avoid.

>>40836588
You use the same reasoning as I do, just the opposite conclusion. But just because something is truly random does not mean that it can't occur.

Take a quantum generator that generates quantum numbers, and pick a number between 1-16. If that generator runs indefinitely it'll never generate the number that you picked? That's what you're suggesting.

>>40837007
Do you know why dubs, trips, quadruplets, and so on at the end of posts are venerated here on 4chan? Because they're rare.
The most common thing is that if the last number is something, the previous one is different.
Let's suppose the last number of your next post is random, because you'll wait for 1 hour before posting it. Would you bet that it's a quad, or a trip or a dub? Or would you bet that the penultimate number and last one are different?
Well, it's the same case here, it's much harder that you get a series of number on your quantum generator AND THEN they also appear on some lottery.
It's much more likely that they are different, just like it's 10 to 1 times more likely that the last two numbers of this post don't match, because the last one was already rolled.
So you're generating a list of numbers TO AVOID, because they were already rolled by your quantum generator.
We have opposite views but 9 out of 10 times the last two numbers of a post aren't going to match, random numbers are more likely to not match.
My bet is so strong I'll have Roy pointing to my last two different numbers of this post.

>>40826166
Emailed!

>>40826109
I think I'll be caught for rigging it if my name comes up that much

>>40836552
Still waiting mine, also bump, also fuck off those who do not believe in this, ¿what are you even doing here?

Not on my shift.

>>40841360
I even have Melate

By the way, my program is in final. Bugs and problems have been ironed out and all the features I wanted to add to it are complete. There probably won't be anymore updates now that it's complete.

I could make a public release where I don't have the APIs configured. I really can't just do a public release or the quantum servers will probably get closed to public access. But, if I release without the APIs configured, then it will just have PRNG and simulated QRNG rather than real QRNG.

I'm beginning to work on another project now. An algorithmic stock trading program.

>>40826152
lol losing 1.5k to the lotto without even buying a single ticket. maybe it'll work out for you

>>40843627
That is the one for which I sent the mail.

>>40843978
What mail? I didn't get a mail for Melate

>>40843987
The Chucruto Hotmail account message: Five combinations of six numbers between 1 and 56.

Never give up.

Good morning.

>>40839913
>don’t say things I don’t like using facts!
Lmao.

>>40825963 (OP)
Can't you just take all the winning numbers from as far back as you can, then run an algorithm for determining the probability and frequency of winning numbers? It's not near perfect, but it certainly affects your chances of winning far greater than any other conventional means.

>>40826705
and this is useful why?

>>40845886
Assuming your lottery is not corrupt then every number has the same chance as every other.
So what you are suggesting is no more use than OPs random generator.

ç

¨

>>40846364
>then every number has the same chance as every other.

That's not the point... if you take all of the winning combinations from the inception until now, you will find specific numbers having been chosen more so than others... along with a possible pattern/range based upon the span and frequency as well.

Ex; see what numbers had been chosen in 6 months, then gauge the timelapse between said numbers to create a rough range for calculating a potential winning combo.

>>40825963 (OP)
Don’t need it
https://youtu.be/1Cz0adbEG9Q

Still waiting those juicy Melate numbers.

>>40849477
Like I said that will tend to random unless the lottery is corrupt. The lotteries are deigned so they’re random.
Those results will reveal some numbers that are no better than chance.
Most lotteries already have those stats.
Here is the UK one
https://www.lottery.co.uk/lotto/statistics
You can do exactly what you suggested - the numbers chosen within a timeframe and how often they came up.
But as each number has the same chance as any other this won’t help at all.