THIS SITE AND FORUM REMAIN UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Cracking Pi introduces the "gravity bet." It is an extension of the original Buffon Needle Problem, 1733.

Buffon, a Catholic, was apparently inspired by similar work of Isaac Newton, but does not appear to have credited Newton. Here it must be noted that Newton's work's were banned by the Roman Catholic Church.

There are two points to be made in Buffon's defense for not crediting Newton when when Buffon published the Needle in "Sur le jeu de franc carreau," 1777. First, Newton's work was a touchy subject in a Catholic country like France. So too in 1733, when Buffon was submitting the Needle in a paper to the Paris Academy of Sciences as he was seeking admission as a member.

Secondly, all paper work concerning the original Needle and "action at a distance" ...and the men involved, including all records of the Paris Academy of Sciences, the Institute of France, the Ecole Polytechnique, the Ecole Militaire, the Parlement of France, the Committee of Public Safety, the Committee of General Security, the secret files of the Vatican, and any other institutional records, as well as the personal papers of virtually anyone in France and later, all of Europe under Napoleon ...came under the personal control and motivated censorship of a single man.

The extension of the Needle is with the old methodology of "action at a distance." This was introduced by Isaac Newton (without Newton crediting Francoise DuLaurens). Newton theorized the concept as a means of predicting the orbits of comets. Newton's books were soon banned by the Roman Catholic Church and the concept "actio in distans" was suppressed.

Action at distance was the ostensible subject of an infamous and corrupt but historically pivotal debate in 1776. From the unbalanced result, the methodology of "action at a distance" was unfairly discredited. The spin off from that debate not only shaped the politics of the French Revolution but expressly shaped the Terror. The modern world's systems of education and science emerged from the Terror. They did not contain the original Needle or "action at a distance" or relativity. Entering the 21st century, the world's systems of public education still do not contain material relating to the original Needle or "action at a distance" or relativity.

In short, entering the 21st century, the concepts and geometric probabilities of the original Needle and "action at a distance" were known and discussed and proven two centuries ago ...but today lack two centuries of evolution. However, despite the suppression by religion and politics, "action at a distance" is now the central dynamic of Quantum Mechanics and Bell's Theorem. The alternative perception is to say that because of the suppression and lack of evolution, "action at a distance" is only applicable to predicting the random spin of particles instead having two centuries of evolution of the "gravity bet."

Shorter yet, the gravity bet, by this or any other name or description, and its geometric probable advantage of .16666, was known two centuries ago ...and was intentionally and maliciously removed from public education ...and has remained outside public education ever since.

The original Needle, and its extension with "action at a distance," is factored by two directions. Taken together, this is the gravity bet.

The gravity bet delivers a flat bet (same amount each time) .16666 advantage over traditional random theory. The advantage is fundamentally inherent in all series of random measurements of anything, including gaming. In gaming, there are special considerations in the differing circumstances of each game regarding arbitrary "rules" and "shapes" of various game objects. In everything else, there are unique factors that need to be recognized and addressed. Once the field is defined by the possibilities, even if only as percentages, the .16666 advantage (and more) is there for the taking. It can only be found with "action at a distance."

The gravity bet is the purest form of "action at a distance." This is exactly as it was theorized by Isaac Newton for predicting the orbits of comets. This is exactly how it was used by Rudjer Boskovic when he breathed life into  Newton's theory. Without any change whatsoever, the methodology is also exactly as it is used, still in its same pure form, as it is used in Quantum Mechanics to predict random particle spin.

In the middle of the 18th century, Rudjer Boskovic brought life to Newton's theories of "action at a distance" to predict the orbits of comets. In the years prior to the pivotal debate at the heart of this history, Boskovic had been lauded in Britain's Royal Academy as the "greatest mathematician in Europe."

In 1776, Boskovic and his methodology of "action at a distance" suddenly became the subject of the longest and most scandal ridden debate in the history of the Paris Academy of Sciences.

In that "debate," the man who challenged Boskovic was the self proclaimed "greatest mathematician in France." He rudely claimed Boskovic was using "action at a distance." The "greatest mathematician in France" was conclusionary as he read from prepared notes. He claimed the methodology of random game theory could predict the randomness of the universe, including the orbits of comets, more accurately than Boskovic's methodology of "action at a distance."

Boskovic could not properly defend his methodology. He could not claim an advantage since "actio in distans" was suppressed by the Church and Boskovic was a priest. He could only partially admit it was a form of "action at a distance," but was just a different way of measuring something.

Boskovic's methodology of "action at a distance" predicted the orbits of comets with a .08333 advantage over traditional random game theory ...but Boskovic couldn't claim the victory because the concept was banned and suppressed.

In its larger context, the entire "debate" was a political set up from the outset. The intent was to publicly embarrass Boskovic in front of Ben Franklin. The plot succeeded. Boskovic could only say his "action at a distance" was just a different way of measuring something. For this reason, although the geometric probability from "action at a distance" actually "won" the debate, Boskovic also appeared to lose the "debate" publicly, on a technicality, on behalf of traditional game theory (see within) since he couldn't point to the .08333 difference as a geometric advantage over the gravitationally meaningless algebra of traditional game theory. Boskovic and his methodology appeared to be discredited. That appearance was greatly helped along at the highest levels of the Paris Academy of Sciences.

Concealing the truth of "action at a distance" and the original Needle and the notorious debate now appears to be the dark impelling force behind the French Revolution's Terror ...as well as the systems of education, particularly science and mathematics, that emerged and continue to educate us today. The intent to withhold geometric probability from public education succeeded as well.

Action at a distance remained discredited until the methodology reappeared in the 1920's. Werner Heisenberg used it to theorize particle prediction in his theory of Quantum Mechanics. The super simple methodology of "action at a distance" (unchanged over the centuries) is the very pulse of Quantum Mechanics and Bell's Theorem.

In 1935, Quantum Mechanics and its methodology of "action at a distance" was challenged by Albert Einstein in his infamous EPR.

In 1964, John Stewart Bell modeled the EPR, with "action at a distance," on a theoretical particle splitter and theorized Einstein would probably lose his challenge, or at least an important part of it.

In 1982, Alain Aspect used a particle splitter --and "action at a distance"-- to prove Bell's Theorem by predicting random particle spin with a .08333 flat bet advantage over traditional random theory and expectations!

Take three random measurements, eliminate the second and predict the third to be a relative pi-angle pole, relative to the first.

It is that simple. Eighth grade simple!

This methodology delivers a flat bet (same amount or measurement each time) advantage over traditional random theory: .08333 .

In gaming --depending on the "game"-- the advantage is doubled since the relative pi-angle pole (an arc of sixty degrees on a circle or wheel) may be geometrically reached from either of two directions along the circumference of the game object. The advantage is that traditional random theory expects and pays off relative pi-angle poles as though they were cardinal poles with ninety degrees of arc on the gaming circumference.

In the great debate of 1776, the "greatest mathematician in France" claimed the randomness of game theory could predict the randomness of the universe with greater accuracy than Boskovic's methodology of "action at a distance."

The "greatest mathematician in France" was quickly proved wrong ...and all the parties knew it ...except no one could admit it since the religious ban applied to all of them. For this reason, the claim that random game theory could more accurately predict randomness than "action at a distance" was allowed (and encouraged for political reasons) to publicly appear to prevail. Simultaneously, efforts to bury everyone's involvement (including the men behind the attack on Boskovic who were making their own covert studies of "action at a distance") were deepened.

Then came the French Revolution. The Terror served to bury the original Needle and "action at a distance" deeper yet. The aftermath continued the deception and these random geometries were intentionally eliminated in the formation of science and education the emerged and grew into the science and education we enjoy entering the 21st century ...still without the original Needle and relativity and geometric probability and, other than Quantum Mechanics, "action at a distance."

In gaming, the gravity bet in its purest form appears applicable only to roulette with a dealer's random release of the ball.

All other random table games, including roulette with a regulated release in any form, require a deeper finesse. The advantage is usually found at the fifth trial, at the diameter base, within a predictable arc of thirty degrees and often less than that. With Random Number Generators, the advantage is not only deeper but quite narrower often being dead center on the smallest gaming possibility within the diameter base. The need for a deeper finesse comes from the unnatural interference with randomness by various game rules and shapes such as a suit of 13 cards in a game of non replacement or the six sides of a cube or regulations requiring a roulette dealer to release the ball over the last successful pocket or instructions to release the ball by quadrants. These rules and shapes may appear to be "random," but they are only random relative to our perceptions of the "game."

As discussed herein, relative to the randomness of gravity (as opposed to randomness relative to perception) the various rules and shapes are all just so much more pi to necessarily be finessed through.

By all appearances, only the perfect circle of roulette --with a dealer's random release of the ball-- reflects the perfect circular nature of gravity while allowing the near perfect (less than "perfect" due to the wheel's frets) geometric probability of a perfect relative pi-angle from gravity's perfect straight line pull.

All random series contain the .16666 advantage. However, other than roulette with a random release, only precisely half that advantage is usually found. On the other hand, the evidence is that the true advantage can be dramatically compounded.

The proof and deductions and inferences of the original Needle are that the only true "randomness" is a game of one of two possible directions. Everything else is a predictable geometric probability. The statistics now clearly indicate that the flat bet advantage on a 38 pocket roulette wheel can be geometrically manipulated into one hundred percent for exactly one half of the pockets!!

That is, with "action at a distance" every random table game may be reduced to the algebraic toss up of one of two random possible directions.

This site and Forum is an exploration of these matters.

The gravity bet is a game changer. It fundamentally effects the gaming industry and Wall Street and the banking and insurance industries and all other uses and measurements of randomness, including actuarial tables.

It now appears, using the geometric simplicity of "action at a distance" (exactly as used by Quantum Mechanics) that every random series tends to predictably duplicate the geometric relationships between the digits of relative 1/4 pi (the original Buffon Needle Problem and life's perception of randomness) and the relative digits of 1/6 pi (what gravity is randomly delivering)!

As discussed herein, this delivers a .16666 flat bet advantage. It is the relative difference between relative 1/4 pi and relative 1/6 pi, factored by two directions. The flat bet advantage is only found with "action at a distance." This is the methodology of Quantum science and the gravity bet.

Since, relative to life's perception, pi is defined by the decimal system, a flat bet advantage of .16666 is not only found within the circle of a "game," it is precisely found as the net bottom line of 100 flat bets, by and at the 100th relative digit, between the respective digits of 1/4 pi and 1/6 pi ...and between 1/2 pi and 1/6 pi ...and more.

This geometrically redefines the nature of pi in the first instance of randomness.

The ratio of a circle to diameter is only a secondary definition of pi that is merely algebraic in nature. It fits our perceptions. This is Euclidean geometry. We can draw a circle and measure its circumference and find that it is a ratio of 3.14159.... to its diameter. That is not factoring the intricate nature of pi and randomness.

Geometrically, a "circle" is simply a series of end points of radii extending from the Center of Rotation (or: COR). Gravitationally, a "circle" is just a perception.

Geometrically, gravity doesn't recognize "circles" or other "shapes." Relative to randomness and gravity, any "shape" that we perceive as or within a "circle" --no matter how complex the "geometry" appears within the "circle"-- is just more algebra (or pi or percentage thereof) in a "circle" of algebra and/or pi. By the random proof of the original Needle, a "circle" is a "game" of quadrants. These are the four Cardinal poles. However, the original Needle identified a Cardinal pole as also having a random value of relative 1/4 pi, relative to the straight line of the circle's diameter (or "pi-angle").

By the proof of the original Needle, in the first instance of randomness, pi is the Center of Rotation of a pi-angle of three poles. Geometrically, pi is the middle pole of a three pole pi-angle. A "pi-angle" is the correct term for what appears to otherwise be a "diameter." However, a "diameter" implies a cross diameter ...and that implies two dimensions with four poles and a circle. Paradoxically, an argument may be made that a real "pi-angle" is the relative cross diameter, relative to the diameter. Thereupon, the argument comes full circle since a "diameter" still implies a "cross diameter." By the proof and deductions and inferences of the original Needle, relative to a diameter, there is a cross diameter which has a single point of geometric probability, factored by two directions. That point is the original Needle's length. It is the universal random average: 1/4 pi (or: "1/4 C"). It is the average of two average measurements. Since is just a mathematical average, it is just a perception.

However, the original Needle proved the average Cardinal pole to also be relative 1/4 pi, relative to the diameter.

Relative to randomness, gravity's straight line pull is along an object or game object's diameter. By the proof of the original Needle, this leads to an ultimate conclusion that life's perceptions are just pi. For their own preservation, the officers and leaders of the Academy (especially including Buffon) needed to conceal their involvement in using the Needle to search for the random truth. That concealment led to an academic fraud. It also motivated the officers and leaders of the Paris Academy of Sciences as they shaped French government policy into the French Revolution ...until their deaths by guillotine. All except one....

One of the Academy's "leaders" now appears to have been responsible for the deaths of the others. When the Academy was closed and replaced by the Institute of France, this default leader took the reins and ...continued the academic fraud. He continued with a special motivation as he successfully led the worlds of science and education into the 19th century and the scientific and educational circumstances we enjoy today. The special motivation was that he, self labelled as the "greatest mathematician in France" ...was the front of the fraud.

In the circumstances leading to and through the French Revolution, this was the geometric and political truth that a handful of men were killed to conceal. These six men were included in the "Girondins." Indeed, the "Girondins" now appear to have been specifically created to conceal the killing of these six. When some of specially targeted men escaped, the laws were broadened to rope them in ...and the Terror began. It was recklessly allowed to spread out of control in the efforts to kill the last two of the original six.

It had all to do with gaming and reputations. The reputation of both traditional random game theory and the "greatest mathematician in France" who would also become the "father of random theory" was at stake.

The reputation of "geometry" and gaming was wrapped within the longest and most infamous debate of the Academy. The exposure of that geometric truth and its history would have ruined the reputation of their apparent killer, the "greatest mathematician in France." He was the unwarranted attacker in that fateful "debate" of 1776. In 1794, more than his reputation was at risk. Before the Terror, if certain powerful men, such as jean Paul Marat, came into even more power, Laplace could easily be guillotined ...even if only for personal revenge. At any time during and after the Terror, Laplace could also be charged with the judicial murder of six men as well as mass murder, identifying him as the real father of the Terror.

Partly, the "greatest mathematician in France" got away with it by staying far in the political background. He would even occasionally have himself removed from various committees and positions so as to appear an innocent victim. Mainly, he succeeded by having three special proteges do the dirty work: Maximilian Robespierre, the ostensible father of the Terror; Joseph Fouche, Minister of Police and who is considered the father of the modern police state; Napoleon Bonaparte, one of the most tyrannous military dictators of all time.

What was it all about?

Its about using the original Needle ...and not offending anyone with its geometric point. In the 18th century, that especially meant not offending the Roman Catholic Church ...especially since France was a Catholic country by royal decree ...more especially, since the Paris Academy of Sciences was also the King's Academy ...and more especially yet, if the Needle was extended by a Permanent officer of the Academy ...with even more special circumstances of concern if that officer was Georges Buffon, Permanent Treasurer of the Academy, and author of the Needle ...and whose works were already banned by the Church!

What's difficult about extending the Needle? Absolutely nothing!

Its the results that give rise to need for a psychological/and or moral leap. Its the results that undoubtedly caused Buffon to have Condorcet look for someone who could be a front for using the Needle and its natural points of geometric probability ...and especially its extension with "action at a distance" ...and who could keep silent about it without ever mentioning Buffon or the Needle.

Here is how the Needle is extended with "action at a distance."  Noting first, the Needle takes two measurements (tosses) ...what happens when three measurements are taken? More, since the Needle proves two measurements are proof of 1/4 pi as an average ...and since an average is just a perception ...what happens to the physical results if three measurements are taken and the middle measurement (a perception) is eliminated? What's left of physical reality if we take away perception?

These simple questions most surely passed through the mind of Buffon. The scary answer would surely have spooked the Roman Catholic Church (just as it would spook Albert Einstein almost two centuries later).

The random results obtained from extending the original Needle with "action at a distance" is the statistical reality that "circles" and "games" do not gravitationally exist. They are just so much pi on a circle of pi ...just perceptions.  All that is randomly rotating and/or being randomly measured in any series of random measurements, including all table and electronic "games," is the single dimension of a "diameter" or "pi-angle" (or straight angle or 180 degree angle).

A pi-angle has two ends. They are points of relative geometric probability. The COR of the pi-angle is what is finessed through with "action at a distance." The COR only has geometric probability one half of the time it is measured. The other half of the time, the COR is the algebraic center of pi. Which side of the COR is measured depends on what methodology is used to make the measurement. The methodologies have numbers associated with them. If Monte Carlo is used, then the number is "four" (or more or infinite). If "action at a distance" is used, the number is: three (or five or more with a deeper finesse).

If "action at a distance" is used, the three part geometric structure of the prediction or bet matches the three pole structure of the pi-angle being predicted or bet

If only traditional Monte Carlo is used, the wheel and the circle and the COR are forever an algebraic statement of relative pi. Without "action at a distance," Monte Carlo methodology automatically structures the prediction or bet into the four quadrants of a circle.

The COR is both the center of a circle of pi ...and the circle of pi itself. When measured randomly, the circle always presents four poles. These are the Cardinal Poles (N/S/E/W).

If "action at a distance" is used, the COR becomes a point of geometric probability as the center pole --the second pole-- on a diameter (or pi-angle) of three poles (ex: S/COR/N).

The ultimate conclusion of the original Needle is that all randomness exists on a pi-angle of three poles, in a world of pi. The deductions and inferences of the original Needle lead to "action at a distance" ...and a world with a flat bet advantage: .16666 .

The gravity bet proves it.

The gravity bet, by this or any other name or description, was apparently known in the back rooms of the Paris Academy of Sciences in the 18th century.

The problem for the Paris Academy of Sciences, and for Georges Buffon in particular, was the all inclusive nature of the Needle and its companion geometry, "action at a distance." By the statistical proof of these random geometries, everything measured randomly is just so much pi in rotation ...including any "games" and theories of possibilities (erroneously called "probabilities") as well as any other such experiments with randomness. All of it, including the results and including even the experimenter ...just pi!

As well as delivering a .16666 flat bet advantage that defies all experience and perception, relative to the randomness of gravity ...it would be clear to an astute observer that even the observer was part of the COR that is finessed through with "action at a distance!"

That leads to the ultimate conclusion. Relative to the randomness of gravity, we are the pi!

How would that have sat with the Roman Catholic Church in the 18th Century?

That was the truth facing Georges Buffon, Permanent Treasurer of the Paris Academy of Sciences, the author of the original Needle! His solution was to find someone to front for the Needle's treasures, including its application with "action at a distance" ...without ever mentioning Buffon or the Needle or "action at a distance." As well, mention and use of pi was to be kept to a minimum. Buffon appears to have had Jean Condorcet unobtrusively find someone with a basic grasp of calculus and who was unafraid of adverse reaction by the Church. Condorcet found just the man and made him a offer that was hard to refuse ...and told him he could be the "greatest mathematician in France."

The fraud was successfully concealed, but as for meeting its intended purpose, it was a disaster. Concealing that academic fraud now appears to be the muscle massage that shaped the French Revolution's Terror.

The flat bet .16666 advantage is the difference between predicting the geometric probability of the relative pi-angle pole, on a pi-angle of three poles, factored by two directions ...and having it be expected and pay off under traditional random theory as through it was a Cardinal pole on a circle of four Cardinal poles.

The old adage "the wheel has no memory" is meaningless. Not because it is wrong, but precisely because it is just that, like the "game" itself: gravitationally meaningless. Relative to gravity, the "wheel" and the "game" do not exist. Only their "diameters" have a semblance of gravitational reality.

By the proof and deductions and inferences of the original Buffon Needle Problem, relative to gravity, "wheels" and all other "shapes" do not gravitationally exist. Relative to the randomness of gravity, such "shapes" are just a perception. Relative to the randomness of gravity, in every series of random measurements, all that is "rotating" (tossed or shuffled or spun) is the straight line of a diameter or, more precisely, a "pi-angle." That is: a "straight angle" or 180 degree angle. It is the straight line of gravity's pull.

The flat bet advantage starts with .08333 . It is the difference between a random Cardinal pole, with a .25 algebraic possibility under traditional random theory, that matches what we perceive ...and the relative pi-angle pole that gravity is randomly delivering with a .33333 geometric probability.

Here is an example. Let there be a roulette wheel with four pockets painted on it (frets present a minor but separate issue that includes a fascinating major exception discussed elsewhere in this site). The four pockets are the Cardinal poles: North, South, East, West. Let a random ball land in the middle of "South."

The methodology of "action at a distance" lets the second ball land anywhere. The second ball is not predicted. The prediction is for the third ball to land in relative "North," with a geometric probability of .33333, factored by the geometric certainty of one direction, of two algebraically possible directions.

Relative to "South," traditional random theory expects and "pays off" relative "North" as a .25 algebraic possibility, at the first or second or third or fourth or any other trial, on a four pocket wheel.

Relative to "South," at the third trial (counting South as the first trial) Quantum Mechanics and the gravity bet predict relative "North" as a .33333 geometric probability at the third trial!

The flat bet advantage of Quantum Mechanics in predicting random particle spin is .08333.... . It is the difference between a Cardinal pole that traditional random theory expects as a .25 algebraic possibility ...and the relative pi-angle pole that gravity is randomly delivering as a geometric probability: .33333.... .

In its application to gaming, the difference is factored by the algebraic possibility of one of two directions on a circle (the "game") with the geometric certainty of one direction. Therein is the flat bet gaming advantage of the gravity bet. That is: .33333.... - .25 = .08333.... . Next: 2 (.08333) = .16666.... .

The concept of "action at a distance" appeared in a theory by Isaac Newton to predict the orbits of comets. Newton's books were soon banned by the Roman Catholic Church and the concept suppressed: "actio in distans." However, the truth of "action at a distance" may be deduced and inferred from the original Needle. The basic underlying concept originated with Newton although Buffon gave no credit in that direction (how could he without exposing himself to serious sanctions from both the Church and the Crown?).

In 1770, the academic fraud was initiated in the Paris Academy of Sciences in response to the religious suppression of works by Newton and Buffon.

The fraud was surely intended to be temporary. However, in 1776, the nature and intent of the fraud was necessarily warped. For political reasons, geometric probability and "action at a distance" became the subjects of the infamous Laplace/Boskovic debate. The fraud then became bloodstained in the French Revolution. Concealment of the original Needle's geometric and political truths now appear as the motive behind the Terror. The fraud was institutionalized in the Terror's immediate aftermath. Four years later it was solidified under Napoleon.

The world, including the stock market, has evolved ever since with that fraud of random theory.

The reason it has continued is that the fraud matches our perceptions. We look at a wheel and we see a wheel. It appears to match our perceptions. We play a random game on the "wheel" and the statistical results match our perception of a game on a wheel with four Cardinal poles.

These are matters of relativity.

Our random "games" are relative to what we sense and perceive and measure. Generally, we perceive our "games" on a "circle" or other shape.

What gravity is randomly delivering is relative to gravity and is always on a relative pi-angle.

As soon as we play a random "game" on the "wheel" ...it ceases to be a "wheel" relative to the gravitational randomness being sought. It only continues to appear as a "wheel" of four Cardinal poles relative to our perceptions. In physical reality, it is no longer a "wheel" of four Cardinal poles that match our perceptions ...it is a rotating and/or randomly measured pi-angle of three poles.

If we measure it randomly (any series of random events including spin of wheel and/or toss of cube and/or turn of card) the circle of four Cardinal poles will statistically appear as a circle ...but only if we predict or "bet" it as a circle of four Cardinal poles.

Things fundamentally change when the three pole geometric structure of the prediction (or "bet") matches the three pole geometric structure of the pi-angle ("diameter" of any game or gaming object) that gravity is creating by gravity's straight line pull. That geometric match up and flat bet advantage is only found with the geometric finesse of "action at a distance."

There is a mental price to pay. The flat bet advantage only makes mathematical sense with a psychological leap: an admission that not only is everything in randomness and gaming a factor of pi ...but since our "games" are just a perception of relative pi, relative to randomness ...the "game" and the pi are in us.

In short: relative to the randomness of gravity, our games are just pi ...and, relative to the randomness of gravity, so are we. We are the pi.

Using "action at a distance," the gravity bet eliminates the algebra of ourselves and perceptions and "games" from the geometry of randomness.

For the past several centuries, the world has measured randomness with the methodology of "quadrature." One distinctive nature of "quadrature" is that it is an average that is basically derived from the methodology of taking and counting each (or selected) random event(s) in a series. This methodology is known as "Monte Carlo methodology."

The gravity bet and Quantum Mechanics are different. The methodology of "action at a distance" requires Monte Carlo ...but only as a vehicle on which is imposed a geometric finesse. The geometric finesse takes each random event but does not count each random event. Rather, it uses the finesse methodology (exactly like the card game of Bridge) to count only every other random event (or deeper) in a series.

The gravity bet, by this or any other name (usually "actio in distans") was known two centuries ago but was lost in the series of religious, academic and political suppression and frauds that are the subject of this analysis. Action at a distance did not reappear until the early 20th century. It is the pulse in the theories of Quantum Mechanics and Bell's Theorem.

So too with the original Needle. Its natural extension leads to "action at a distance." Its geometric truth of pi was concealed at the heart of the fraud.

The gravity bet is a unification of the original Needle Problem and the methodology of “action at a distance.” This delivers geometric probability ...and a flat bet advantage of .16666 over traditional random expectations. This is the mathematical difference between the random algebra of life's perceptions of quadratic possibilities on a circle (that is: traditional random theory) ...and the geometric probability that gravity is randomly delivering.

The Quantum sciences, including Bell’s Theorem, predict random particle spin with a .08333 flat bet advantage over traditional random theory.

The Quantum advantage is relative to a particle's semi circle. Deductively, it is identical with the gravity bet’s flat bet advantage of fundamentally predicting the random spin of anything with a .16666 advantage relative to a complete circle or field or “game.” In other words, the Quantum advantage of .08333 and the gravity bet's advantage of .16666 have the identical root and value.

The gravity bet lifts the flat bet advantage of Quantum theory out of the laboratory and into the street. Apparently, anyone can now predict any random series with a theoretical fundamental .16666 flat bet advantage over traditional random expectations.

The difficult thing about Quantum Mechanics (and Bell's Theorem) is that it is a staggeringly complicated experiment with particle splitters. Take away the complications of the experiment, and even a chimp could be taught the underlying methodology that delivers the Quantum magic of a .08333 flat bet advantage. This is the super geometric simplicity that Einstein predicted held the grail that eluded him.

Roulette provides a near perfect model. Cards and random number generators also produce a flat bet geometric advantage.

While this appears to end random gaming as we know it, the gaming industry aptly characterizes itself as an entertainment industry ...and entertainment is always salable in its colorful and multitudinous forms. Games of roulette and cards will only require rules change. The algorithm in random number generators needs only be upgraded to adapt to geometric probability.

This theory and proof of geometric probability includes an advanced "seed" concept from which the relativity flows. This is extended to the fifth trial, at a pi-angle base, narrowed by half, when randomness is compromised by various "game" rules and shapes. Cards, and roulette with other than a random release, fall into this category.

Random number generators will follow the geometry of their algorithms ...which also contain a flat bet advantage.

Each random event automatically falls within a matrix of one of three probabilities on a three pole pi-angle: 1) a pi-angle and/or diameter base relative to life's perception 2) the Center of Rotation as the "game" 3) a relative pi-angle pole relative to gravity and the pi-angle base (or "diameter base").

In the game of geometric probability (as opposed the "game" of quadrature) all three probabilities overlap simultaneously. The geometric finesse of "action at a distance" eliminates the "game" as the COR (Center of Rotation) and finds the relativity between the pi-angle base (or "diameter base") and the relative pi-angle pole (that is: between the first and third events).

Each series of random events holds a cornucopia of flat bet geometric probabilities that are impossible to find without using a geometric finesse through the inherent relativity delivered by "action at a distance."

In poker, what is geometrically dealt depends on whether the cards are from a well shuffled real deck or from a random number generator. For example, in five cards off the top, a real single deck tends to deliver the fifth card relative to a pi-angle base in a circle of card possibilities. This allows players to have a previously undreamed of probability knowledge of an opponent's hand ...as well as the next card to be turned!!

On the other hand, (no pun intended) a random number generator tends to deliver the fifth card off the top relative to a pi-angle pole in a circle of card probabilities. That is, in card games, the algorithm of most commercial RNGs tends to deliver a fifth card that does not statistically fit with the first card in terms of a pair or possible straight based on the first card. It does this (fails to fit into a pair or straight) with a predictable flat bet advantage (or disadvantage as the case may be) that is closely proximate to relative 1/4 pi. That is: .78539.... !

That fifth card is just the beginning of a fruit bowl of predictable geometric probabilities from random number generators.

Players using electronic poker hands for TEXAS HOLD 'EM need no longer wonder why their hands tend to not fill out on the River.This appears true for the algorithm of all random number generators, including those found online as well as in video Poker slot machines. RANDOM.ORG recently included a "random" poker hand. It too delivers the same tendency for the fifth card to avoid a pair or straight.

Do all RNGs tend to deliver similarly?

If not, was a compromised random number generator, unintentionally or otherwise, introduced to and through virtually all video Poker games?

The algorithm of one electronic roulette game delivers a whopping flat bet advantage hovering around forty percent.

Recently, another site (not affiliated with CRACKING PI) prepared a "Pi-odds Spread Sheet." It used a random number generator (apparently it was a random number generator) representing a European roulette wheel. It delivered a .16666 advantage at the pi-angle pole (unusual for a random number generator) but what the publisher apparently didn't see was a staggering flat bet advantage of .90 (ninety percent) at the diameter base with a deeper finesse. With less than 200 trials in the "Pi-odds Spread Sheet," more trials are obviously needed for that algorithm.

In Craps, using "action at a distance," the additional "dimension" of the game object's shape makes the next toss predictable with extraordinary geometric precision. Not for what will come up... but for what will not come up.

Gaming is the least of these matters. Wall Street awaits a good faith effort. Between November, '06 and January, '07, a five week study of the 12 most active stocks in the Wall Street Journal were tracked and (theoretically) "bet" in accord with the gravity bet. All that was looked for was whether the stock would geometrically go up or down on a particular day and time relative to a previous particular day and time. There was an approximate 13 1/2 percent flat bet advantage at the relative pi-angle pole and an approximate 14 1/2 percent flat bet advantage at the relative pi-angle base. The largest institutions on Wall Street were then notified of this phenomenon. A year later, some firms started reporting an unprecedented annual profit around .15 .

On Black Monday, 2008, the market crashed in Europe ...and Greece went down. Most unusually, on that day there were over 700 hits on this then fledgeling Cracking Pi site (that had never been advertised). At that time, the average daily hits were less than a hundred. Unless it was a very strange co-incidence, it appears some people very busy tracking Cracking Pi during the European debacle.

The gravity bet levels the field!

Anyone may now play the market with the same advantage as the Pi-odds Stock Market Study and certain Wall Street firms. The advantage closely approximates .16666 .

The Stock Market has often been compared to roulette. Along with gaming as the near perfect model, the Pi-odds Forum will also review the Pi-odds Stock Market Study and open a more comprehensive geometric analysis.

The gravity bet has been tested exhaustively with roulette and significantly with cards and random number generators. It has also been slightly tested with random psychology, geology and biological distributions. These tests were extremely limited but successful. The Pi-odds Forum is open for discussion and deeper testing in these areas.

Outside Quantum theory, everything measured randomly to date, without "action at a distance," has only reflected algebraic possibility. The Forum will match up participants, pollsters, developers and resource people to rewrite random theory in accordance with their interests in geometric probability.

These are grounded breaking matters and students are encouraged to seek credit for their participation.