Probability of Change

[wandelaar]

30 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

No. Keep in mind that we start with 49 stalks. The initial value of L1 is between 1 and 47. The initial value of R1 is between 2 and 48.

 

rem(R1 - 1) 2..48 is rem(1)..rem(47), and rem(47) yields 3. So there are twelve opportunities to achieve 1-3 and only eleven opportunities to achieve 4. This slightly changes the odds.

 

But that's not how it is done in the video. Do you have references where it says that a division in say 1 stalk for left and 48 stalks for right is just as likely as say 25 for left and 24 for right?

[Lost in Translation]

I'm not saying that a person will do that. I'm saying that statistically it is possible for a person to do that. 

[wandelaar]

But than we are calculating the probabilities for different situations.

 

I suppose that the heap of stalks is divided roughly in half.

 

You reckon all divisions from L1 = 1 & R1 = 48  to L1 = 47 & R1 = 2 as equally likely (at least statistically).

[Lost in Translation]

5 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

But than we are calculating the probabilities for different situations.

 

I suppose that the heap of stalks is divided roughly in half.

 

You reckon all divisions from L1 = 1 & R1 = 48  to L1 = 47 & R1 = 2 as equally likely (at least statistically).

 

Correct. I have considered altering my program to iterate only "likely" outcomes, such as splitting the stalks 1/2 +- 5 or some such. That will give more likely percentages.

[wandelaar]

4 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

Correct. I have considered altering my program to iterate only "likely" outcomes, such as splitting the stalks 1/2 +- 5 or some such. That will give more likely percentages.

 

Yes - it would be interesting to see whether your results approach those of Wikipedia and others when you do that.

[Lost in Translation]

3 hours ago, wandelaar said:

3 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

Correct. I have considered altering my program to iterate only "likely" outcomes, such as splitting the stalks 1/2 +- 5 or some such. That will give more likely percentages.

 

Yes - it would be interesting to see whether your results approach those of Wikipedia and others when you do that.

 

I added customizable variance to my program and ran it from +- 1 through +- 10 (e.g. stack size / 2 +- 1, etc.). The results are unexpected.

Variance: 1
Permutations: 8
Yang (old) percent: 25.000000
Yang (young) percent: 25.000000
Yin (old) percent: 0.000000
Yin (young) percent: 50.000000

Variance: 2
Permutations: 64
Yang (old) percent: 18.750000
Yang (young) percent: 31.250000
Yin (old) percent: 6.250000
Yin (young) percent: 43.750000

Variance: 3
Permutations: 216
Yang (old) percent: 16.666667
Yang (young) percent: 33.333333
Yin (old) percent: 8.333333
Yin (young) percent: 41.666667

Variance: 4
Permutations: 512
Yang (old) percent: 18.750000
Yang (young) percent: 31.250000
Yin (old) percent: 6.250000
Yin (young) percent: 43.750000

Variance: 5
Permutations: 1000
Yang (old) percent: 20.000000
Yang (young) percent: 30.000000
Yin (old) percent: 5.000000
Yin (young) percent: 45.000000

Variance: 6
Permutations: 1728
Yang (old) percent: 18.750000
Yang (young) percent: 31.250000
Yin (old) percent: 6.250000
Yin (young) percent: 43.750000

Variance: 7
Permutations: 2744
Yang (old) percent: 17.857143
Yang (young) percent: 32.142857
Yin (old) percent: 7.142857
Yin (young) percent: 42.857143

Variance: 8
Permutations: 4096
Yang (old) percent: 18.750000
Yang (young) percent: 31.250000
Yin (old) percent: 6.250000
Yin (young) percent: 43.750000

Variance: 9
Permutations: 5832
Yang (old) percent: 19.444444
Yang (young) percent: 30.555556
Yin (old) percent: 5.555556
Yin (young) percent: 44.444444

Variance: 10
Permutations: 8000
Yang (old) percent: 18.750000
Yang (young) percent: 31.250000
Yin (old) percent: 6.250000
Yin (young) percent: 43.750000
 

Here is the average percentage if the split variance is between 1-5 stalks:

 

Yang (old) percent: 19.834
Yang (young) percent: 30.166
Yin (old) percent: 5.166
Yin (young) percent: 44.834

 

And here is the average percentage if the split is between 1-10 stalks:

 

Yang (old) percent: 19.272
Yang (young) percent: 30.728
Yin (old) percent: 5.728
Yin (young) percent: 44.272

 

I think these last numbers are the most accurate for real world use. 

Edited June 15, 2018 by Lost in Translation
Corrected mathematical notation

[wandelaar]

So we see that the probabilities vary depending on how accurately the heap of sticks is divided in half. The division may not be done too precisely in half and it may also not be done too haphazardly! The heap of sticks has to be divided only roughly in half, or else the probabilities for the different kinds of lines will come out "wrong".

[OldDog]

Aren't we getting a little wrapped around the axle with all this about probabilities?

 

Perhaps the longest tradition for casting is the yarrow stalks. I think we have to accept that those who devised the method were aware of the probabilities ... perhaps even deliberately established the balance (or imbalance, if you prefer) according to some rationale now lost to us.

 

That there are other methods in use suggests that guidance for the oracle is being received with success.

 

One thing I would say is that whatever the method used, it seems that it is the manipulation that is important in establishing connection with the oracle and making the result relevant to the inquirer. As an inquirer, I would be skeptical of any casting that I had not personally performed ... I would want to be fully vested in the result. 

 

So, in the case of the yarrow method, any variance in the division of the stalks ispart of the process that informs the result. Same could be said for coins, marbles or any other medium for casting.

 

 

[wandelaar]

13 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

I added customizable variance to my program and ran it from +- 1 through +- 10 (e.g. stack size / 2 +- 1, etc.). The results are unexpected.

Variance: 1
Permutations: 8
Yang (old) percent: 25.000000
Yang (young) percent: 25.000000
Yin (old) percent: 0.000000
Yin (young) percent: 50.000000

 

(...)

 

31 minutes ago, OldDog said:

Aren't we getting a little wrapped around the axle with all this about probabilities?

 

Perhaps the longest tradition for casting is the yarrow stalks. I think we have to accept that those who devised the method were aware of the probabilities ... perhaps even deliberately established the balance (or imbalance, if you prefer) according to some rationale now lost to us.

 

That there are other methods in use suggests that guidance for the oracle is being received with success.

 

One thing I would say is that whatever the method used, it seems that it is the manipulation that is important in establishing connection with the oracle and making the result relevant to the inquirer. As an inquirer, I would be skeptical of any casting that I had not personally performed ... I would want to be fully vested in the result. 

 

So, in the case of the yarrow method, any variance in the division of the stalks ispart of the process that informs the result. Same could be said for coins, marbles or any other medium for casting.

 

What we see here is that we would never get the result old yin when the division in half of the heap of stalks is done too precise. So the problem isn't entirely academic.

[OldDog]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

What we see here is that we would never get the result old yin when the division in half of the heap of stalks is done too precise. So the problem isn't entirely academic.

 

Agreed. I guess my point is more at having overly detailed knowledge of the probabilities involved can detract from the process of the consultation of the oracle. As you are dividing the stalks what are you thinking about ... your inquiry or how the stalks are being separated? Does that affect the connection to the oracle or any synchronicity involved in the process? I gotta think so.

[Lost in Translation]

@OldDog  I would not worry about that. I'm a math geek. Any excuse to calculate something is good enough for me!

[joeblast]

I saw this thread and said ooh, probabilities!  But then, meh, yarrow.  More fun to discuss the nonlinear phenomena that result from the coherent arranging of conditions

 

[OldDog]

23 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

I'm a math geek

 

HA! I am no math geek ... but I have run into a few.

 

In pursuit of a BS degree (Bachelor of Science, not the other kind) I minored in math figuring that if I took twice as much math as needed I would retain about half ... just enough to support a chemistry major.

 

Though, I will admit that Probability of Random Variables was a great course and go me thru some quantum mechanics math.

 

(Wink, wink, nudge, nudge)  ; )

[wandelaar]

For those willing to tackle an open mathematical problem related to the I Ching see:

 

https://old.reddit.com/r/math/comments/6nmp2e/commutative_rings_with_64_elements/

 

That will keep you busy for some years to come...

 

 

 

[zafrogzen]

On 6/15/2018 at 4:54 PM, Lost in Translation said:

Yang (old) percent: 19.272
Yang (young) percent: 30.728
Yin (old) percent: 5.728
Yin (young) percent: 44.272

 

I'm an ignoramus when it comes to math, but what I gather from the above and prior discussions is that the Yijing is skewed towards yin when the yarrow stalk method is used. It's been suggested this was the original method (are you sure about that?) and that this was intentional and there's some meaning to it.

 

What comes to mind is the first noble truth of Buddhism, that this world or life is characterized by dissatisfaction and suffering -- darkness, rather than light. The Christian notion of original sin is in the same vein. Both those views have always bothered me. They look like one-sided sour grapes over the fact that things aren't always perfect or the way we think they should be and that we need to look to another life somewhere else for satisfaction -- (http://www.frogzen.com/uncategorized/eternal-life/ 

 

I find the thought that the Yijing is also negative about this life to be pretty disappointing. I thought that daoism was more down to earth (not in the dark sense of Yin).

 

Maybe I'm wrong and this life really does suck but I've always seen this world as basically balanced between those opposites, like dark and light, which are just two sides of the same stick and therefore basically one quality. We're bound to prefer one side over the other, but when such discrimination is abandoned, or at least accepted, then this life is really quite wonderful, albeit not always perfect or exactly as we would prefer. But without suffering and darkness, the opposite would not be possible, just as you can't have up without a down.

Edited June 17, 2018 by zafrogzen

[Lost in Translation]

@zafrogzen Nice article. Perhaps you can open a thread on that topic.

[zafrogzen]

Thanks. I'm of the school that believes that Daoist notions of of immortality weren't really about making this individual body/mind immortal but were pointing to something beyond that. As Suzuki Roshi liked to say, "If we didn't die, we'd really have a problem."

 

 

[Michael Sternbach]

3 hours ago, zafrogzen said:

 

I'm an ignoramus when it comes to math, but what I gather from the above and prior discussions is that the Yijing is skewed towards yin when the yarrow stalk method is used. It's been suggested this was the original method (are you sure about that?) and that this was intentional and there's some meaning to it.

 

What comes to mind is the first noble truth of Buddhism, that this world or life is characterized by dissatisfaction and suffering -- darkness, rather than light. The Christian notion of original sin is in the same vein. Both those views have always bothered me. They look like one-sided sour grapes over the fact that things aren't always perfect or the way we think they should be and that we need to look to another life somewhere else for satisfaction -- (http://www.frogzen.com/uncategorized/eternal-life/ 

 

I find the thought that the Yijing is also negative about this life to be pretty disappointing. I thought that daoism was more down to earth (not in the dark sense of Yin).

 

Maybe I'm wrong and this life really does suck but I've always seen this world as basically balanced between those opposites, like dark and light, which are just two sides of the same stick and therefore basically one quality. We're bound to prefer one side over the other, but when such discrimination is abandoned, or at least accepted, then this life is really quite wonderful, albeit not always perfect or exactly as we would prefer. But without suffering and darkness, the opposite would not be possible, just as you can't have up without a down.

 

The Yijing, in keeping with this original method of consulting it, may indeed be inclined a little more towards the yin side, however, I would not equate the latter with negativity and suffering, but with softness and yielding (i.e., non-resistance) in the Daoist sense of the "water course way".

[Michael Sternbach]

On 14.6.2018 at 11:58 PM, wandelaar said:

@ Michael Sternbach

 

Thanks for your opinion. If as you say there are certain patterns in the way the I Ching works that go beyond the common sense explanation I gave, then it should be possible to set up experiments to show those patterns. Or do they disappear when we try to explore them?

 

Sounds interesting... I'm all for it! What kind of experiments do you have in mind, though?

[wandelaar]

@ zafrogzen

 

What exactly is your problem? How do you think the percentages should be?

[wandelaar]

4 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

Sounds interesting... I'm all for it! What kind of experiments do you have in mind, though?

 

See the new topic:

 

"Tests for the non-random character of the I Ching"

[zafrogzen]

11 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

The Yijing, in keeping with this original method of consulting it, may indeed be inclined a little more towards the yin side, however, I would not equate the latter with negativity and suffering, but with softness and yielding (i.e., non-resistance) in the Daoist sense of the "water course way".

 

Yes, I thought of that aspect of yin when I was writing that response. General Daoism is much more into the "Valley Spirit" and that aspect is also seen in the Yijing -- but only where Yang has put itself below Yin, as in Modesty and Peace. Otherwise the Yin power is usually quite negative as in Splitting Apart and Darkening of the Light. Even The Receptive  is only positive when it is subservient to The Creative and becomes very negative when it tries to compete. I've always been surprised by how negative Yin is in the Yijing, given that it is almost exalted in regular Daoism. Skewing the results towards yin, as in the yarrow stalk method, looks like overkill to me. Maybe I'm wrong, but I suspect that most folks who use the yarrow method do so because they think it is older and more authentic and not because the results are any better.

 

8 hours ago, wandelaar said:

@ zafrogzen

 

What exactly is your problem? How do you think the percentages should be?

 

I thought I was quite clear -- the percentages should be balanced, as in the three coins method.

Edited June 17, 2018 by zafrogzen

[Lost in Translation]

Part and parcel of the I Ching is that the oracle responds to the question you put before it. The manner in which you ask the question matters. This includes your choice of words, your phrasing, and your methodology. I think the I Ching is quite adaptable.

 

For example there are times when I want a very quick answer to a basic question. In this case I am not interested in a detailed reading and just want an impression so I use an on-line resource to digitally generate a hexagram. Other times I have a very serious question and I want a highly detailed answer so I use the yarrow stalk with multiple translations. In either case I get a proper response. It's up to me to derive meaning from the response.

 

I find the statistical analysis fascinating but I do not let the variable probabilities (based on method) distract me. They are, for lack of a better word, unimportant.

[wandelaar]

@ zafrogzen

 

Taoism doesn't need the I Ching. Lao tzu and Chuang tzu don't recommend it.

[Anzhi]

On 6/13/2018 at 4:32 PM, wandelaar said:

It should be possible to run a simulation on a computer where the hexagrams change according to the moving lines. In the long run we can then look which hexagrams turn up more often then others. If the hexagrams have an objective meaning, than the world would have to be a different place depending on whether the yarrow-stalk method or the coin-method is correct. I don't see how both could be correct, unless the hexagrams don't have an objective meaning. But in case the meaning of the hexagrams is largely subjective or intuitive the problem doesn't arise.

Very rich thread and lots of furthering possibilities.  
I have pondered the outputs of various methods and whether they detract or add. I think from experience the yarrow (or their probabilities in a suitable method of casting) appear to be closer to the "mark" in responses, sometimes as has been mentioned freakingly so, down to exact words/phrases used in question. But the role of our intuitive field is important It is not just the book but the interaction, as with all synchronistic events. There is something mysterious in this. I do not discount other methods of approach for synchronicity and our intuitions can work with all things, as does the Tao, but just clearer perhaps rather than a slight fog. 
Holographic properties are inherent here I think. With holography if the original plate for projection is shattered any piece will project the original but not as clearly. I see holographic qualities in the Yi.
Ritually and preparing the receptive spirit, nothing beats the yarrow stalks. I'd like to get real ones, not skewers however, though painted.