Seeing through Randomness
A thought experiment
(Disclaimer: We could repeat this experiment with a statistically significant audience. Unfortunately, I don’t have the resources to do that. So, dear reader, take this, not as a “scientific experiment” but as a “thought experiment”).
Setup
This animated gif (Box World 1) consists of a grid of red and white boxes. A box could be red or white with an equal (50%) random probability. So any patterns you see are entirely random.
I generated a very similar grid (Box World 2). The generation method is identical to Box World 1, except for five boxes.
Four boxes (in shape of a cross) were white all the time. While the box in their centre changed colours at a constant frequency.
Experiment 1
I asked a group of friends, “Each of the box worlds is either random or NOT random. Which of the following is true?”
- Both are random
- Only one is random
- Only two is random
- Neither is random
All claimed that both were Random.
Experiment 2
I then revealed that Box World 2 was not random. But didn’t show why. Instead, I encouraged my friends to explain why it was not Random.
Again no one was able to spot the cross. Instead, they came up with various theories. I noticed two patterns in the theories:
- The assumption that intervals of time that were different were the same. And hence, that boxes changed colour with constant frequency, when they didn’t.
- Mistaking the colour of boxes.
The second pattern was a simple error. The first pattern was more interesting. It seemed that “time” was a bi-product of the pattern. Just as the pattern could be a bi-product of time.
Conclusions
Based on my statistically insignificant thought experiment, I came to the following conclusions.
- Humans are bad at “seeing through” randomness.
- Humans see patterns where none exists.
- Humans don’t have an absolute sense of time. Instead, time infers from changing patterns.