> On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:08:17 -0500, Existential Angst wrote: > >> Would be the digits of e, pi, et al? >> If that's the case, no need for fancy pyooter algorithms? >> >> Inneresting article on pi, randomness, chaos. >> http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/pi-random.html > > Is it not the case that the digits of e, pi et al. can't strictly > be random, if it is only because they are highly compressible? I.e. > because there small, compact formulas that spit out as many digits as you > want in a completely deterministic way?
Of course, that's also the case for the "fancy pyooter algorithms" that Existential Angst wants to replace, so he or she is not really talking about random but about pseudo-random sequences. Calculating the digits of pi or e etc (and, presumably, some simple combinations thereof) is harder than the super fast "fancy" algorithms already used, so I don't see the benefit.