EPIC WIN.

I'd write a blog about that too if it happened to me.

I'm sure there's a rational explanation to this.

There better not be. I wanna enjoy my victory

Find someone else whose calculator of the same model has never been used as a random number generator, then see if the first set of random numbers produced is the same again.

Yes, I will embark on this time-consuming quest. Although I find it hard to believe that an algorithm would specify what the first random number will be when it's first used. But then again I don't know how algorithms and all that work.

Not to be a party pooper, but it's possible that it is programmed to do exactly what it did just to guarantee it works.

Otherwise, does it have any kind of storage memory? If you can, delete it and try again.

Actually... When I took a C+ course, we had to make number randomizers. Now we could do it two ways. THe first follows the same algorithm or something, and nomatter where you do it, the numbers would always be the same. Meaning everytime you execute the program you'd get the same line of numbers always.
Now there was another way that truly made randomized number.

But I think the calculator may have a pre-set random set of numbers, but I just don't think the calculator forgets the previous numbers used, so it keeps going ahead of the line.

You should try to erase the memory or something, to see if it makes the same numbers again.

Here comes Tnex, raping our sense of wonder once again.

Just to point out that no computational algorithm can produce truly random sequences. You'd need random number tables for that.

*neeeeeeerd*

The odds are the same as any other sequence of numbers. That would be 0.05*0.05*0.05*0.05*0.05=0.0000003125. Life is made up of one unlikely event after another. Billions of them. But only one in a billion does one catch our eye, seem significant. Thus, statistically insignificant events become lodged in memory as fate, signs, hauntings, miracles, and any other nonsense persuasive to anyone who doesn't understand probability or statistics.

Of course, it is possible that this was programmed by the manufacturers to demonstrate random number generation. If they were idiots.

I highly doubt it that it was programmed to show that sequence of numbers for a few reasons.

One, it's an expensive CAS manufactured by Texas Instruments, not a demo toy.

Two, its memory has been erased before and then used by my friend occaionally who used this random number function many times before but never bothered to show me how to do it.

Three, the example and screenshot in the instructional manual thingo that I was reading was not published or written by the Texas Instruments people.

Four, I've tried erasing the memory and reseting to factory settings, and it doesn't give me the same sequence. Yes it may be pseudo-random, but I don't think anyone intentionally made it display the exact 6 numbers during the first time the generator is activated.

So I like to think this was just a bizzare co-incidence

But then again, the stuff T-nex said could be true too. Who knows..

Alternatively, it's simply a result of their algorithm. Algorithms are predictable, and they follow a pattern, no matter how random the output seems. If the same five digits show up under the same circumstances every time, you've demonstrated that their algorithm is hugely dependent on how many random number sequences have already been performed by that unit.

If the same sequence of number sequences is generated by the same sequence of random number sequence generations, for several different sequences of random number sequence generations, then you've shown it's pretty much the only "random" element of the algorithm.

Yeah, I suppose that's true.