Like Faye Dunaway with the LAHLAH envelope? https://...gridcosm?level=4064 Probability rules for "Natural" or unbiased music +movie synchronicities* (an Oh Dissertation/ Simultaneous Hunanamus) ((ie the undisputed facts of Film/ music synchronicities)) (*this subject applies as a preliminary and prerequisite baseline reference for postulating any sort of probility rules for biased or intentional sourced synchronicities. In other words, before we specualate or postulate theories on the culpability of sources to be intentional or biased by proxy to a common form or rule or source or table or theory or law or scheme, we must examine the 'natural' mathematical rules of hypothetically unbiased sources. that is to say films and music or an other analagous data sets that are factually nonrelated. One must also obviously conclude that anyone that actually produced 'biased' sources or intentional synching by some rite, would have aswell done the math on exactly what is happening when a song is playing to a movie, if any attepmt to manage the phenomenon on a practical or acurate or signnificant level had been truly applied. How else would you optimize your output right? lol. this is also exactly what a skeptic would do to explain away synching as "unintentional"(the party line being that intentional synching is conspiracy theory and that the high probability of natural synchronicity supports the notion. The problem with this copout is invisibly obviouse to the skeptic because it asks those who have seen synchs that are supected of being intentional to accept that difinitive levels of precision are more likely accidental than on purpose. But if it looks built, isnt it likely it was? No one wonders if a chair is manmade or natural...) But lets just assume that we are unbiased. lets just look at whats going on in synchs. so we start by understanding what happens on a hypothetical natural. Or rather the simplest and unavoidable parts first Synch Laws: ____________________________________________________ all possibles = (mundane + significant) significant = (positive + negative)) The difinitive quantites of the hypothetical natural [mun + sig = all] [sig = pos + neg] The binary assuptions of the hypothetical natural: [Mun = sig] [pos = neg] we must assume a binary equality in order to have any sort of refereance to an actual value. we have to assume that since the the sources are hypothetically unbiased then all the data of the the total source set is, for all practical purposes to getting started, equally likely, as they are hunanimosuly influenced by thier own universally unbiased nature. have to! Because we know that the likelyhood of an event being mundane or sigificant is completly indipendant of its own nature. remember we are looking for the probability of a sync being intentional or not by comparing it to a hypothetically natural one. mathematically speaking, our opinions are expost facto and dont even matter! I know its confusing defining terms but they are all equally arbitrary. we arnt even looking at the probability of the observor to find an event significant, just assuming an even potentiality in an unbiased source, where clearly the probability of categorization depends soley on the number of categories itself. And we have yet to quantify the event. How do you measure synching anyway? Time? Number of comonalities? Quality? What exactly is the currency? well lets get on with the logic of purelly unintentional synch allready we have defined the parts of a synch ie the initial categories of what happens in a synch: an interaction between lyrics and film/captions is either: mundane (not signficant or synchy in any way, to a hypothetical observer) OR significant(to the hypothetical observer). If any given moment of a synch is Significant, it is either positive or negative, according to error theory, and interms of being applicabley true or false by implication. This too we must assume is binarilly equal because the data in the set is assumed to be of the same natural source, or rather equally influenced by nothing. good or bad if its a significant event its all gasoline and it all burns at the same rate and temp. these assumptions have to be fair enough because the hypothetical natural is similar to an unobserved quantum state. even tho maybe in irl we should just be looking at the probibility of a hypothetical observer thinking a synch is a synch? wdf but wait. we are attempting to set a baseline for how a non intentional synch ought to behave so that we can compare that to suspected intentioanl data, right? so how can the foundation of this hypothesis be a baited consession that things are equally good or bad? am i actually suggesting that good and bad are equally probably? value and quantity or not synonimous in mathematics. all units of measurements are relative, but the rules remain the same its the same old thing. are there more even or odd numbers? perhaps we on start with something measurable first!?! maybe look at TIME? ______________________________________________________________ __________ when a person watches or looks for or finds a film + music synchronicity their are particulare criteria. assume their isnt. what we know: any song can be played along to any part of a film and observers will say they were in or out of synch. one could set some average values say a film is 100 minutes for argument sake say measuring in half seconds is a practical evaluation. a half second margin of error isnt too bad (alltho the acceptable margins of error in more professional synching should be upwards of a 1/4, an 1/8 or a 1/10 of a second) so say theres 12,000 half seconds of film on average. depending on what is synching the formulas are a lil different when it comes to full album synchs, just start with single songs. (ok assume the few minutes we would have to synch to a film is offset to itself in our average video length variable V. its not like your gona start a synch with 1 second left of movie. but also not with 1 second of song. its easeir to just say its a loop and that any amount of song thats before or past the start or end of the film is the same position on the opposite side. so V is indeed V) it doesnt matter 90 minutes 100 any exponential difference in these variables based on runtime is smaller than the exponential improbabilites encountered of the binary hypothetically unbiased model before you score five points so, an arbitrary run time is addequate. get a grip so why not. say the total possible number of positions = 1/6000you could do 1/5000. you could measure by the second. just get on with it. Oh wait thats it right there are 3 or 4 or 5 or 6000 thousand places to play a song to a movie. that should tell us something right? so maybe a 1/5000 odds on a singularly correlated( by field error) intentional fim album synch. right. the probabilities ofthe hypothetical ntural would have to be close to that for the common synch to be a naturally occuring thing.(*nb excepting that a metered or proxy based modular type formate could be considered 'natural' interms of the natural mathematical realtionships of incremental data sets) ok well its back to criteria. what makes anyone of these 6000 things a synch? lets define some terms. a synch is a song played to a film that has "synch events". A synch is generally contigent upon having as little contridictory events or errors as well. so lets look at the sych event an event can be measured in time and maybe that gets you some where. lets say our average song is 200 seconds. its easy. 3 minutes 20 seconds. so 400 half seconds we can than say the average film has 6000 positions AND that the average 1 song synch has 400 distictly measurable events or moments of play. in order to be a synch some of these events have to be significant and most have to be good and mostly not bad. ______________________________________________ so start again with the original synch formula "S = AxV  PCB/SCB where S = the amount of time of viable synch playback, which is equal to A the Audio length times V the video length, minus what is disqualified by a personal or standard confirmation bias. ( the basictenant of error theory) which says ANY possibility is infact in synch UNLESS it is DISQUALIFIED by a personal or standard confirmation bias. As counterinuitive as it seems it is simpler to say 'what makes NOT a synch'. but how can this lend itself to the hypothetical natural when its detemined by the PCB/SCB? again you might as well be looking into the probabilities of the bias itself. but assume there is a heaven and for probability purposes its possibile to have a song that plays at anypoint in a movie and still seems synchronized if not intentional to the observer. So the Confirmation Bias Formula, or ERROR THEORY, says that " if you think its synchs" = everything minus "if you think it doesnt synch "it synchs or it doesnt, and whos to say? especially in a hypotheticall unobsereved environment. thats why yhe assumtion of equality in the unbiased natural is a fair baseline for comparison before you can begin to evenspeculate as to weather synch events are naturally common, engineered, or are the byproduct or recidual sideeffect of metered or intervalaic systems. forget word frequencies and language patterns and cultur and mood all the other minutia of things one might think could influence a synch. just say that for the hypothetical natural, theres no accounting for why an event may be significant nor weather it is positive of negative if it is. It only suggests that the probability of a type is only dpentandt on the number of types exctly because it cant be dependant on anything else. So mun = sig because mun + sig = all and 'all' has a unified lack of bias in itself, so its componentn parts must also. sig = (pos + neg) for the same reason. weather we like it or not this is the only fair place to stand. but wait thats only 3 categories! well call it mun = mun1 + mun2. maybe mun1 is when 2 things dont mean shit and mun2 is an event where the audio offers no relevant data to correlate. either way the probabilty here is the same there are 4 categores determining probabilty of what any event might be: 50% mun 25% sig pos 25% sig neg this is the assertion of the hypothetical natural. the reason it is usefull is becaus it will give us a comprable baseline to compare to other probability models. since we have defined a synch interms of sync events in a set of total events disqualified by errors we can formulate a baseline probability for the number of positive synch events as well as a lack of errors. this can tell us the hypothetically natural improbability of a synch based on the number of error free positive events. does this really make sense? remember our song has about 200 event moments Of course one could define a significant, positive event as a literal correlary ie the same word. this interactions happen in fields of events and thats ok, look at what has been said; of the 400 events, 200 are significant, 100 are positive and 100 are negative.? thats doesnt seem right. isimply because some sync points take more than an instant to happen but most of them are instant. and theres not 100 of them! kinda makes you think about that old MTV 6 second attention span standard... so what is being counted counting? if a word or a drum synchs its only for as long as its being said or played. instantaneous... how much time is in synch? or how many events seem syncronized? How often can a person count or notice a synch event anyway? if a song says " blue" for a moment but the movie is blue for a minute how much is that? whats the average number of words in a song got to do with it? and what does the potentiality of a singular postition have to do with the potentiality of the whole field? surely a a song with the name of the character in the movie has a higher chance of at least that corelarry right? What if we are lineing up beads instead? if yur listening to sunglasses at night and the guy in the movie is wearing sunglasses at night the entire time what is that? Perhaps we can leave out the positives of the hypnat using error theory. In otherwords we have concluded that the odds of everything in a sync being right = to the odds of nothing happening at all? perhaps not. perhaps its expontentially imrprobaly based on the number of errors consecutivly avoided. so theres a song playing to a movie. (perhaps sig and mun intervalwise have to be adjusted to reflect the rate of information observed by the obserervor.) if any hypnat event is 25% error? are there typically 100 errors a song? no. look at the literal coerrilary itself: nothings goin on and then something in the song and the movie is the same. it hapens over and over in a good synch. even if you could calculate the probabity of nonerror i mean jesus probability doesnt begin to define a synch... but try again anyway. if the hypnat pos and neg are assumed to be the same rate then we can count a neg for each pos we count! 1 pos = 25% chance if for every positive ther is a neg than! 3/4 of the pos are non error if P is the number of positives in an error free synch than each pos is only 75% as likely if P = N: 1P = 25% .25^p 2P = 6.25 3P = 1.57 4P = .394 if 1 N free per P = 75% or 25x .75^p P(0N) = 18.75 2P = 14.06 3P = 10.54 4P = 7.91 5P = 5.93 6P = 4.44 7P = 3.33 8P = 2.50 9P = 1.87 10P = 1.40 25 wrong ok ok we arnt (thinking outloud...) the hypothetical natural applied to observed events... so the term all = all observed. der ta der make a distinction between our Audio interval value and observed Adio value.. Our avg song has 400 half second conmparible events. or 100 obs. 2 second events. 50 are mun 25 are p and 25 are n 25p ive seen 25 significant things in a sync so thats believable. so the hypnat would say a synch is totally probabable but the point of the hypnat is that we have found a probability for n relative to p. what are the odds of 25P0N if p and n are = probable?? what are the odds if they are even lol p = 25% n = 25% p0n = 18.75 .018 point is you get an exponentially unlikely (less than 1 percent) probability after about 10 or 20 positive corelarries with no negating errors if you use the probabilities of the hypothetical natural. it dwarfs the 1/5000 " gotta be ateast one good place to play this song to this flic) probability in terms of rareness.i conclude that the probabilities of a hypothetical unbiases or natural set or sources shows the average error free synch is highly unlikey as to tweather they are intentional or a byproduct of metered, intervalaic common denominatoris or an intentional proxy is unclear
