So apparently it was done with a crowd of 24 people using automatic writing, then taking an average of their results.
I.. really don't know what to make of that.
Also, the colour red is coming up SO much through this show. All the adverts for it beforehand, the stage that it's being filmed in, it's in all the adverts between, there was a bit in the middle where he had a red and blue team tossing coins, where the red team were decked entirely from head to toe in the colour, and winning in a crushing victory.
I'm beginning to think this whole show is a suggestion or a form of mass manipulation. Neither the prediction using 24 people nor the fixing of the machine suggested seem at all plausible. I just watched an hour of fluff where I learned nothing of how he "predicted" the results.
That's what I'm thinking. Telling people how to win the lottery is a great way to get a huge, suggestible and greedy audience, just right to manipulate. The bit about willing events to happen with your mind was completely un-Brown, and using automatic writing to predict the result? That's the polar opposite of rationality. I'm sure this is a setup for something bigger.
Wow. He really knows how to fuck with your head! I'm not sure what to think at the moment really... I really hope he didn't fix it, but the other bits he did throughout the show kind of make me think that he was just building up our sense of anticipation, rather than fear, to make us believe they could have actually predicted all 6 numbers right... only then to say 'there really wasn't a knife/mouse/secret psychologically based formula'. It was a trick all along and he just fixed the thing.
If nothing else he is one heck of a showman, and I cannot wait to see what he has planned next week. I want to know if he can stick me to my seat... I'm guessing if it does work, it won't work with everyone.
Also, is it just me, or is Derren Brown ridiculously attractive? My fiancee agrees, but suggests perhaps he's manipulating us to think that. As he so elequontly put it once 'he could fuck you and you'd never know'.
Well, occam's razor and all that. It is entirely possible that the BBC agreed beforehand to use whatever number his random group of people came up with. After all, are they really any more random than the machines they use anyway? That's assuming of course that the entire automatic writing section was faked.
Basically, either he made a deal with the BBC, he broke the law, or psychic powers are real. Clearly we're supposed to believe the last one.
*edit* Don't get me wrong, I want to believe so hard. If a sufficiently large group of people genuinely can influence events purely by thought then fuck me sideways.
That was disappointing. If he doesn't in a later show say 'yeah, that first show was just bollocks made to get X response from certain people which was useful in the long game' then this could be a career killer, given just how much bollocks was just spouted.
He is very intelligent, and usually very good at this, so for now I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in assuming that this was deliberate bollocks.
Well, occam's razor and all that. It is entirely possible that the BBC agreed beforehand to use whatever number his random group of people came up with. After all, are they really any more random than the machines they use anyway? That's assuming of course that the entire automatic writing section was faked.
Basically, either he made a deal with the BBC, he broke the law, or psychic powers are real. Clearly we're supposed to believe the last one.
People are terrible at generating random numbers, so no. In his method, even if humans could generate random numbers perfectly, each number would still be a Gaussian distribution with mean 25, which is very much the wrong type of randomness.
It wouldn't surprise me if they used a time delay and he used his standard suggestion tricks to get them to write down the correct numbers. Or if he really fixed it he could have fixed it for 3 draws in a row to get that result. But that's almost as unlikely as magic psychic maths.
That was reasonably clever. Brown gave two alternate theories, that appeal to different sets of people. Believe whichever one you choose.
What a bunch of chucklefucks in the automatic writing group. Did they not notice he didn't show them the numbers beforehand? If I were there, I'd whisper, "okay guys, make sure you make a copy of your numbers, then when he's gone we'll check."
The reason Wisdom Of Crowds works for guessing-the-weight competitions is because:
a) it's not random
b) weight is on a continuous scale
c) generally people are okay at them (I was miles off guessing a peanut squash the other week though. Motherfuckers are dense.)
None are true for lottery numbers. They're discrete integers - adding up and dividing gets you nothing.
Watching the reveal again and seeing it on a bigger TV made me think I saw a camera flick after all.
[ Also: Derren Brown is gay. Your fiancee's out of luck, oddment. You, however.. well, let's just say I think you could be persuaded. ]
That was reasonably clever. Brown gave two alternate theories, that appeal to different sets of people. Believe whichever one you choose.
What a bunch of chucklefucks in the automatic writing group. Did they not notice he didn't show them the numbers beforehand? If I were there, I'd whisper, "okay guys, make sure you make a copy of your numbers, then when he's gone we'll check."
The reason Wisdom Of Crowds works for guessing-the-weight competitions is because:
a) it's not random
b) weight is on a continuous scale
c) generally people are okay at them (I was miles off guessing a peanut squash the other week though. Motherfuckers are dense.)
None are true for lottery numbers. They're discrete integers - adding up and dividing gets you nothing.
Watching the reveal again and seeing it on a bigger TV made me think I saw a camera flick after all.
[ Also: Derren Brown is gay. Your fiancee's out of luck, oddment. You, however.. well, let's just say I think you could be persuaded. ]
Haha, actually we're both in luck as we're both guys.
If I am understanding this right, the number averaging thing couldn't work at all.
I mean, what if one of the numbers came up a 1? In order to get an average of 1, everyone would have to mark a 1. Hell, even if you want to round down, your odds of getting everyone to average 1 or less are ridiculously horrible instead of the 1:50 you might expect if the number were just chosen in the lottery.
If I am understanding this right, the number averaging thing couldn't work at all.
I mean, what if one of the numbers came up a 1? In order to get an average of 1, everyone would have to mark a 1. Hell, even if you want to round down, your odds of getting everyone to average 1 or less are ridiculously horrible instead of the 1:50 you might expect if the number were just chosen in the lottery.
Playing devil's advocate (I'm sticking with the split screen theory), he told them that they were able to write down negative numbers too.
I did like the tale he told at the end of the show though. But like many of you guys, I'm hoping this is a lead-up to a massive, genuine payoff at the end.
If there is no 'extra' reveal then that was 1 hour of my life totally and utterly wasted.
Derren Brown did 'The System' the show where he apparently picked the winner of 6 horse races in a row. That show was bold, brilliant television with an important message about rational thinking.
This lottery show was the exact opposite. It was terrible television because it was clear right from the very start that his explanation was going to be total bullshit. Anyone who believes that explanation is a credulous moron and the terrible thing is that there will be many many people out there who do believe him, thus promoting the type of wooly thinking that I'm fairly certain Brown abhors.
If I am understanding this right, the number averaging thing couldn't work at all.
I mean, what if one of the numbers came up a 1? In order to get an average of 1, everyone would have to mark a 1. Hell, even if you want to round down, your odds of getting everyone to average 1 or less are ridiculously horrible instead of the 1:50 you might expect if the number were just chosen in the lottery.
Playing devil's advocate (I'm sticking with the split screen theory), he told them that they were able to write down negative numbers too.
I did like the tale he told at the end of the show though. But like many of you guys, I'm hoping this is a lead-up to a massive, genuine payoff at the end.
In some regards it "wisdom of the crowds" thing was reasonably clever. The first time it was done (which we didn't see) they got 1 number right. The second time they did it they got 3 numbers right, this wasn't just pure luck, The 6 people who were adding up and dividing the numbers knew what target numbers they were aiming for, in the case where there was a fraction I'm sure they'd round towards the target, thus effectively giving 12 numbers rather than 6. In the third instance Tyler was an obvious plant.
If there is no 'extra' reveal then that was 1 hour of my life totally and utterly wasted.
I wouldn't say the whole hour was wasted. The bit with the cups was pretty gripping television even if it really had nothing to do the lottery part. That was just Brown being Brown and predicting which ones he would stamp on.
If there is no 'extra' reveal then that was 1 hour of my life totally and utterly wasted.
I wouldn't say the whole hour was wasted. The bit with the cups was pretty gripping television even if it really had nothing to do the lottery part. That was just Brown being Brown and predicting which ones he would stamp on.
Okay then, 55 minutes of my life wasted.
Incidentally, there is apparently footage of Derren Brown on an open top bus last year November 2008 (on Oxford street with the Christmas lights on show). With 6 children each one holding one of the selected balls.
Apparently shown to the audience that were at the live show and reference to Brown filming it is on Derren Brown's blog (currently unavailable bu accessible via google cache).
If there is no 'extra' reveal then that was 1 hour of my life totally and utterly wasted.
I wouldn't say the whole hour was wasted. The bit with the cups was pretty gripping television even if it really had nothing to do the lottery part. That was just Brown being Brown and predicting which ones he would stamp on.
Here's the disproof of that deep maths bollocks, which follows on from what people have said above about continuous/descrete distributions:
Replace every number with a symbol (circle, star, cat, house, etc). The odds remain identical to the lottery, but how do you calculate the sum or mean of those symbols?
There's no numerical pattern to be found in the lottery, or at least, not one which the values influence.
There's really no need to explain why the large group theory is bollocks maths. Anyone who would understand an explanation as to why it's bullshit already knows enough maths to know it's bullshit.
Replace every number with a symbol (circle, star, cat, house, etc). The odds remain identical to the lottery, but how do you calculate the sum or mean of those symbols?
That's a neat way of explaining "discrete integer" to people. I'll remember that for when I encounter cretins.
I wonder how many offices around the country are going to try to organise this next week.
Am I the only person who finds Derren Brown's explanation perfectly plausible? As our world is ever more interconnected both physically and emotionally, coincidences can be pretty much engineered and the line between mathematics, sciences and spirituality is pretty much non-existent. If that's too much for some people to get their head around, that's unfortunate but, fortunately, times are always changing.
Well, occam's razor and all that. It is entirely possible that the BBC agreed beforehand to use whatever number his random group of people came up with. After all, are they really any more random than the machines they use anyway? That's assuming of course that the entire automatic writing section was faked.
Basically, either he made a deal with the BBC, he broke the law, or psychic powers are real. Clearly we're supposed to believe the last one.
*edit* Don't get me wrong, I want to believe so hard. If a sufficiently large group of people genuinely can influence events purely by thought then fuck me sideways.
The problem is, that premise is entirely against everything he does. The entire premise for his shows has been "I'm not a magician, I don't have psychic powers, I'm just very, very smart". He's completely rational and non-spiritual. To suddenly claim that a group of 24 people using automatic writing, not motivated by winning, can somehow predict a completely random sequence of numbers, is complete bollocks.
Using the illustration of 'guessing the weight of an ox' is moot. The weight of that ox, if that even happened, is definite and real, it is not a random event. The lottery numbers, the next ones to be drawn, are not based on a pattern. There is no pattern or order that they will appear in.
What about the theory he himself put forward (in a very nod nod wink wink, I would never do this way) that he had simply fixed the lottery? I mean, the guy is all about the spectacle, he's a showman, that's what he does. 'Predicting' the lottery exactly right gets people talking, it's a big event. His 'explanation' was probably just misdirection in order to further fuel discussion on how he did it, when all along he did just fix the thing.
I am starting to agree with people here though... the first show was to draw people in (again, the spectacle). The next events are the ones that will really fuck with peoples minds. I hope.
You'd need to do more than put heavy balls in the tumbler, I think. They get whacked around a fair bit.
That said, he could totally knock the security guards out.
"Hey look, it's Derren Brown!"
"Hello guys; could you tell me the way to the One Show se- your mind is my plaything; you want to lie down."
Æthelred on
pokes: 1505 8032 8399
0
Options
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
edited September 2009
He didn't fix the lottery and it seems fairly obvious that the explanation must be a trick in itself, which although interesting is a bit unsatisfying.
Mojo_Jojo on
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
Yeah, I liked the way he did that part, with almost a "I totally did this, but am not going to admit to it since it's illegal" air. But then he obviously didn't do that.
The one, seemingly irrefutable fact of this, is that the numbers he had matched the numbers of the draw. The rest seems entirely like illusion and misdirection. With the subtext of the show being about how getting people into the right emotional state is the key to controlling them, it really does seem like this is a setup to something bigger.
What about the theory he himself put forward (in a very nod nod wink wink, I would never do this way) that he had simply fixed the lottery? I mean, the guy is all about the spectacle, he's a showman, that's what he does. 'Predicting' the lottery exactly right gets people talking, it's a big event. His 'explanation' was probably just misdirection in order to further fuel discussion on how he did it, when all along he did just fix the thing.
I am starting to agree with people here though... the first show was to draw people in (again, the spectacle). The next events are the ones that will really fuck with peoples minds. I hope.
For what its worth I dont buy the DEEP MATHS explanation or the split screen explanation. The DEEP MATHS just doesent make sense and the split screen just seems too easy to want to believe from the point of view of the viewer.
I mean we're conditioned in entertainment to know that have all the facts avalable to us at any time there to pick out if we're smart enough. From the point of view of an armchair know it all of course this 5 minutes of footage contains some vital clue that makes it obvious how it was done if you just look close enough.
It appeals to our belief that through the camera we are seeing all the facts. They may have tried to pull off a camera trick but look! this wobble at a vital second on youtube, the fact that he went to the left here when he coudl have gone right PROVES what really went on! I mean, thats what they do on CSI right?
In reality though even if there was camera trickery theres no reason it couldnt have gone off without a hitch and we would never know. Saying "oh it was obviously split screen" is just a futile attempt to sound authoritive becasue it was it was an illusion, unless you were privy to how it was done it wasnt "obviously" anything.
Why were the balls not in front of him? Why be on the opposite side of the screen?
I'm leaning more to it being split screen, but, like others, i believe the only reason for this is that the first show is the opener for something bigger.
Also, i can totally do the one trick where he wins every paper, scissors, stone he plays with a bunch of people outside a football pitch. It really pisses people off after the 10th straight loss.
Theres a Derren Brown trick I accidentally videotaped when he was on a talk show I learned how to replicate. Basically its a mind reading thingy, you get the person to draw something then reveal you know what they've drawn. The guy did a spiral.
Basically the trick is when Brown is doing his patter he says something like "its not a complex picture like a house or anything very simple shape. clear your mind and it should be growing forward to you now" and at this point he's leaning back in his chair gesticulating and basically drawing a spiral in the air with his hand. Once you've seen and watched the patter a few times you can do it yourself on your friends.
Basically all his "i knew you were going to do that" tricks work along the same lines I think. If you pick 47 its becasue he suggested you pick 47.
If I am understanding this right, the number averaging thing couldn't work at all.
I mean, what if one of the numbers came up a 1? In order to get an average of 1, everyone would have to mark a 1. Hell, even if you want to round down, your odds of getting everyone to average 1 or less are ridiculously horrible instead of the 1:50 you might expect if the number were just chosen in the lottery.
Playing devil's advocate (I'm sticking with the split screen theory), he told them that they were able to write down negative numbers too.
I did like the tale he told at the end of the show though. But like many of you guys, I'm hoping this is a lead-up to a massive, genuine payoff at the end.
That's fine, then the normal distribution would be centered at 0, assuming people are reasonably random (which I don't think is a valid assumption, I guess).
What about the theory he himself put forward (in a very nod nod wink wink, I would never do this way) that he had simply fixed the lottery? I mean, the guy is all about the spectacle, he's a showman, that's what he does. 'Predicting' the lottery exactly right gets people talking, it's a big event. His 'explanation' was probably just misdirection in order to further fuel discussion on how he did it, when all along he did just fix the thing.
I am starting to agree with people here though... the first show was to draw people in (again, the spectacle). The next events are the ones that will really fuck with peoples minds. I hope.
For what its worth I dont buy the DEEP MATHS explanation or the split screen explanation. The DEEP MATHS just doesent make sense and the split screen just seems too easy to want to believe from the point of view of the viewer.
I mean we're conditioned in entertainment to know that have all the facts avalable to us at any time there to pick out if we're smart enough. From the point of view of an armchair know it all of course this 5 minutes of footage contains some vital clue that makes it obvious how it was done if you just look close enough.
It appeals to our belief that through the camera we are seeing all the facts. They may have tried to pull off a camera trick but look! this wobble at a vital second on youtube, the fact that he went to the left here when he coudl have gone right PROVES what really went on! I mean, thats what they do on CSI right?
In reality though even if there was camera trickery theres no reason it couldnt have gone off without a hitch and we would never know. Saying "oh it was obviously split screen" is just a futile attempt to sound authoritive becasue it was it was an illusion, unless you were privy to how it was done it wasnt "obviously" anything.
It does seem odd if they cut out that footage. I think the guys second theory on why that is the case is probably the correct one, but if that's the case, we won't know until the last show.
Also, anyone else notice that before this thing started, people said 'four events'. Now it's five events. Perhaps there are only 4 actual events, and the fifth show will be a culmination of all four, somehow???
Theres a Derren Brown trick I accidentally videotaped when he was on a talk show I learned how to replicate. Basically its a mind reading thingy, you get the person to draw something then reveal you know what they've drawn. The guy did a spiral.
Basically the trick is when Brown is doing his patter he says something like "its not a complex picture like a house or anything very simple shape. clear your mind and it should be growing forward to you now" and at this point he's leaning back in his chair gesticulating and basically drawing a spiral in the air with his hand. Once you've seen and watched the patter a few times you can do it yourself on your friends.
Basically all his "i knew you were going to do that" tricks work along the same lines I think. If you pick 47 its becasue he suggested you pick 47.
Yup, this is why I'm fascinated with him. When he's performing a trick like that, everything he's saying and doing is designed to manipulate the person to get the desired result. I find it both awesome and a little terrifying that he can be so disarming and come over one way, when the whole time he's manipulating the thought processes of the person.
Posts
I.. really don't know what to make of that.
Also, the colour red is coming up SO much through this show. All the adverts for it beforehand, the stage that it's being filmed in, it's in all the adverts between, there was a bit in the middle where he had a red and blue team tossing coins, where the red team were decked entirely from head to toe in the colour, and winning in a crushing victory.
I love the idea that he fixed it, but sleight of hand/camera tricks are still most likely.
And then we worship him as our new god.
If nothing else he is one heck of a showman, and I cannot wait to see what he has planned next week. I want to know if he can stick me to my seat... I'm guessing if it does work, it won't work with everyone.
Also, is it just me, or is Derren Brown ridiculously attractive? My fiancee agrees, but suggests perhaps he's manipulating us to think that. As he so elequontly put it once 'he could fuck you and you'd never know'.
*Thanks Thanatos!
Basically, either he made a deal with the BBC, he broke the law, or psychic powers are real. Clearly we're supposed to believe the last one.
*edit* Don't get me wrong, I want to believe so hard. If a sufficiently large group of people genuinely can influence events purely by thought then fuck me sideways.
And then on the last one he'll just tell them how gullible they are.
He's actually doing a public service if he does that.
He is very intelligent, and usually very good at this, so for now I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in assuming that this was deliberate bollocks.
People are terrible at generating random numbers, so no. In his method, even if humans could generate random numbers perfectly, each number would still be a Gaussian distribution with mean 25, which is very much the wrong type of randomness.
It wouldn't surprise me if they used a time delay and he used his standard suggestion tricks to get them to write down the correct numbers. Or if he really fixed it he could have fixed it for 3 draws in a row to get that result. But that's almost as unlikely as magic psychic maths.
What a bunch of chucklefucks in the automatic writing group. Did they not notice he didn't show them the numbers beforehand? If I were there, I'd whisper, "okay guys, make sure you make a copy of your numbers, then when he's gone we'll check."
The reason Wisdom Of Crowds works for guessing-the-weight competitions is because:
a) it's not random
b) weight is on a continuous scale
c) generally people are okay at them (I was miles off guessing a peanut squash the other week though. Motherfuckers are dense.)
None are true for lottery numbers. They're discrete integers - adding up and dividing gets you nothing.
Watching the reveal again and seeing it on a bigger TV made me think I saw a camera flick after all.
[ Also: Derren Brown is gay. Your fiancee's out of luck, oddment. You, however.. well, let's just say I think you could be persuaded. ]
Haha, actually we're both in luck as we're both guys.
*Thanks Thanatos!
I mean, what if one of the numbers came up a 1? In order to get an average of 1, everyone would have to mark a 1. Hell, even if you want to round down, your odds of getting everyone to average 1 or less are ridiculously horrible instead of the 1:50 you might expect if the number were just chosen in the lottery.
You end up with something closer to a normal distribution of numbers, instead of the discrete uniform distribution that the numbers in the lottery actually follow.
Playing devil's advocate (I'm sticking with the split screen theory), he told them that they were able to write down negative numbers too.
I did like the tale he told at the end of the show though. But like many of you guys, I'm hoping this is a lead-up to a massive, genuine payoff at the end.
Derren Brown did 'The System' the show where he apparently picked the winner of 6 horse races in a row. That show was bold, brilliant television with an important message about rational thinking.
This lottery show was the exact opposite. It was terrible television because it was clear right from the very start that his explanation was going to be total bullshit. Anyone who believes that explanation is a credulous moron and the terrible thing is that there will be many many people out there who do believe him, thus promoting the type of wooly thinking that I'm fairly certain Brown abhors.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
In some regards it "wisdom of the crowds" thing was reasonably clever. The first time it was done (which we didn't see) they got 1 number right. The second time they did it they got 3 numbers right, this wasn't just pure luck, The 6 people who were adding up and dividing the numbers knew what target numbers they were aiming for, in the case where there was a fraction I'm sure they'd round towards the target, thus effectively giving 12 numbers rather than 6. In the third instance Tyler was an obvious plant.
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
I wouldn't say the whole hour was wasted. The bit with the cups was pretty gripping television even if it really had nothing to do the lottery part. That was just Brown being Brown and predicting which ones he would stamp on.
Sometimes I Stream Games: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/italax-plays-video-games
There is no way this fucker is going to glue me to my seat. And if he does, I will eat my own cock.
Okay then, 55 minutes of my life wasted.
Incidentally, there is apparently footage of Derren Brown on an open top bus last year November 2008 (on Oxford street with the Christmas lights on show). With 6 children each one holding one of the selected balls.
Apparently shown to the audience that were at the live show and reference to Brown filming it is on Derren Brown's blog (currently unavailable bu accessible via google cache).
I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.
Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
Replace every number with a symbol (circle, star, cat, house, etc). The odds remain identical to the lottery, but how do you calculate the sum or mean of those symbols?
There's no numerical pattern to be found in the lottery, or at least, not one which the values influence.
That's a neat way of explaining "discrete integer" to people. I'll remember that for when I encounter cretins.
I wonder how many offices around the country are going to try to organise this next week.
edit:
I think what's more unfortunate is that someone who thinks in such a way is allowed to report the news.
The problem is, that premise is entirely against everything he does. The entire premise for his shows has been "I'm not a magician, I don't have psychic powers, I'm just very, very smart". He's completely rational and non-spiritual. To suddenly claim that a group of 24 people using automatic writing, not motivated by winning, can somehow predict a completely random sequence of numbers, is complete bollocks.
Using the illustration of 'guessing the weight of an ox' is moot. The weight of that ox, if that even happened, is definite and real, it is not a random event. The lottery numbers, the next ones to be drawn, are not based on a pattern. There is no pattern or order that they will appear in.
I am starting to agree with people here though... the first show was to draw people in (again, the spectacle). The next events are the ones that will really fuck with peoples minds. I hope.
*Thanks Thanatos!
That said, he could totally knock the security guards out.
"Hey look, it's Derren Brown!"
"Hello guys; could you tell me the way to the One Show se- your mind is my plaything; you want to lie down."
The one, seemingly irrefutable fact of this, is that the numbers he had matched the numbers of the draw. The rest seems entirely like illusion and misdirection. With the subtext of the show being about how getting people into the right emotional state is the key to controlling them, it really does seem like this is a setup to something bigger.
But then, that's what he wants us to think.
Son of a bitch.
Take this with a huuuuuge grain of salt but: http://ninethirtyfive.wordpress.com/2009/09/12/derren-brown-lottery-reveal-missing-footage-proves-he-rigged-it/
For what its worth I dont buy the DEEP MATHS explanation or the split screen explanation. The DEEP MATHS just doesent make sense and the split screen just seems too easy to want to believe from the point of view of the viewer.
I mean we're conditioned in entertainment to know that have all the facts avalable to us at any time there to pick out if we're smart enough. From the point of view of an armchair know it all of course this 5 minutes of footage contains some vital clue that makes it obvious how it was done if you just look close enough.
It appeals to our belief that through the camera we are seeing all the facts. They may have tried to pull off a camera trick but look! this wobble at a vital second on youtube, the fact that he went to the left here when he coudl have gone right PROVES what really went on! I mean, thats what they do on CSI right?
In reality though even if there was camera trickery theres no reason it couldnt have gone off without a hitch and we would never know. Saying "oh it was obviously split screen" is just a futile attempt to sound authoritive becasue it was it was an illusion, unless you were privy to how it was done it wasnt "obviously" anything.
I'm leaning more to it being split screen, but, like others, i believe the only reason for this is that the first show is the opener for something bigger.
Also, i can totally do the one trick where he wins every paper, scissors, stone he plays with a bunch of people outside a football pitch. It really pisses people off after the 10th straight loss.
Basically the trick is when Brown is doing his patter he says something like "its not a complex picture like a house or anything very simple shape. clear your mind and it should be growing forward to you now" and at this point he's leaning back in his chair gesticulating and basically drawing a spiral in the air with his hand. Once you've seen and watched the patter a few times you can do it yourself on your friends.
Basically all his "i knew you were going to do that" tricks work along the same lines I think. If you pick 47 its becasue he suggested you pick 47.
That's fine, then the normal distribution would be centered at 0, assuming people are reasonably random (which I don't think is a valid assumption, I guess).
There we go then.
It does seem odd if they cut out that footage. I think the guys second theory on why that is the case is probably the correct one, but if that's the case, we won't know until the last show.
Also, anyone else notice that before this thing started, people said 'four events'. Now it's five events. Perhaps there are only 4 actual events, and the fifth show will be a culmination of all four, somehow???
*Thanks Thanatos!
Yup, this is why I'm fascinated with him. When he's performing a trick like that, everything he's saying and doing is designed to manipulate the person to get the desired result. I find it both awesome and a little terrifying that he can be so disarming and come over one way, when the whole time he's manipulating the thought processes of the person.