how to evade ban?

[Urgent2009]

Jinx what ? You create your own ' luck '

"Well, simply, based upon interactions of 2 subsystems each with 2 particles (of course they work in pairs) to describe the overall system state of “luck”. There is a principle of entanglement that states that subsystems with no deterministic state can produce a joint system with a known state. Now, based upon the fact that everything in the universe must be in some sort of stable equilibrium, any shift would need to be adjusted back to the mean. So, let’s picture a 4 particle system. There are 2 pairs of particles that are entangled with each other. Now imagine that pair 1 (subsystem A) interact to create a probablistic “bad” state. This specific action shifts the system out of equilibrium (but still a deterministic overall state of “luck”). Now, if the 2nd pair (subsystem B) does the same, the entangled properties of both pairs create an overall bad “luck” state. And based upon the shift of equilibrium, those 2 pairs could be entangled to another 2 pairs that could also form some sort of smaller or larger “bad luck” state based upon the probabilities of the individual subsystems. Now, a system cannot exist for too long out of equilibrium and eventually the probablistic shift will create a “good luck” state too to balance out.

Now, if you could imagine this at a much grander more complex level, you could definitely see the oscillatory interactions between numerous entangled subsystems that would explain the same overall state (“good luck” or “bad luck”) but interact at different degrees of that state."

 

[darkbluefirefly]

"Well, simply, based upon interactions of 2 subsystems each with 2 particles (of course they work in pairs) to describe the overall system state of “luck”. There is a principle of entanglement that states that subsystems with no deterministic state can produce a joint system with a known state. Now, based upon the fact that everything in the universe must be in some sort of stable equilibrium, any shift would need to be adjusted back to the mean. So, let’s picture a 4 particle system. There are 2 pairs of particles that are entangled with each other. Now imagine that pair 1 (subsystem A) interact to create a probablistic “bad” state. This specific action shifts the system out of equilibrium (but still a deterministic overall state of “luck”). Now, if the 2nd pair (subsystem B) does the same, the entangled properties of both pairs create an overall bad “luck” state. And based upon the shift of equilibrium, those 2 pairs could be entangled to another 2 pairs that could also form some sort of smaller or larger “bad luck” state based upon the probabilities of the individual subsystems. Now, a system cannot exist for too long out of equilibrium and eventually the probablistic shift will create a “good luck” state too to balance out.

Now, if you could imagine this at a much grander more complex level, you could definitely see the oscillatory interactions between numerous entangled subsystems that would explain the same overall state (“good luck” or “bad luck”) but interact at different degrees of that state."

Luck or Logic?

 

[ToeNailsInMyFeces]

If I may please offer my own humble opinion on this here matter.

Luck is an epistemic uncertainty that we attach to outcomes we like (i.e, if you bet on 6 and you roll a 6 you were lucky), there is no such thing as luck in a deterministic universe, only our inability to have access to a list of all true propositions about the state of the world and together with the laws of physics derive/determine/compute what will happen a second from now (say, the toss of a dye). Luck is an epistemic and antropomorphic concept and not an ontological one. There are no probabilities in a deterministic universe, there is only epistemic uncertainty.