From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad!fx35.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada,comp.programming,comp.databases.xbase.fox,comp.lang.clipper
Subject: Re: Simulating the rolling of dices to produce truly random numbers?
Message-ID: <d4pc5dhq7k32cka9ccgqr3hevchj4sj8t5@4ax.com>
References: <p35cnr$s04$1@toylet.eternal-september.org>
 <1bshbdljfk.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net>
 <p35i4q$5o5$1@toylet.eternal-september.org>
 <66jc5d9lmlk2r5gediaoq8rp2to2svs024@4ax.com> <p35l7a$5e9$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/7.20.32.1218
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise
 we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 13:09:56 -0600
X-Received-Bytes: 1659
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3101654043
X-Original-Bytes: 1515
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.c:204221 comp.lang.ada:49856
 comp.programming:20481 comp.databases.xbase.fox:198 comp.lang.clipper:3116
Date: 2018-01-10T13:09:56-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:15:05 +0000, Richard Heathfield
<rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

>On 10/01/18 17:32, Robert Wessel wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> QM (in its modern form) is considered a massively
>> solid theory, backed by masses of
>> evidence[... It] is also incomplete, and in conflict
>> with relativity's understanding of gravity [...].
>> Which is why the search for the so-called
>> "Theory-of-Everything", is such a thing...
>
>I suppose it's almost too obvious to mention, especially as there are so 
>many great minds involved in the search --- but has anyone looked behind 
>the settee?


Well, that would certainly be embarrassing...

I wonder if any of my socks are back there too?