premium bonds.

[Taipan]

2x£25
1x£50
3x£100

Get in!

[Bustaspoke]

I've just won £100,my only other win this year was £50 i April.

[Wreckless Rat]

cashed mine in... bought a plane

[weeksy]

cashed mine in... bought a plane

They're only £15 !

[Le_Fromage_Grande]

I've got £100 of Premium Bonds, and I've won £100 from them, as far as I'm concerned they're pure profit, I can't lose on them.

[Wreckless Rat]

cashed mine in... bought a plane

They're only £15 !

Bugger.... I was ripped off then.

[Mr. Dazzle]

There were more prizes in July than June, and from August there will be more again as they are putting their interest rate equivalent up to 4%.

4% isn’t bad for a super safe tax free place to park fifty large with instant access.

Don't you have to have them for several years in order to win at the average rate though? On average of course. So its also entirely possible you'd get buggery nothing for a year or three.

Well, that's why I was hoping to compare with other people.
If anyone dares risk the wrath of the haters then it would be interesting to see how much people have in and what their wins are.

There is a belief/myth that newer premium bonds win more than old ones sitting there forever, NS&I completely deny this but it's always been true for me, I usually win more when they're new. Of course, this theory is obviously deeply flawed, if I'd have left them sitting there I might have won a million and that would have bust my theory, and obviously newer ones will win more than none at all

I've heard it's spectacularly complicated to work out the effective rate, the Money Saving Expert site claims they had to get a load of cosmology physicists (who are used to dealing with the maths of uncertainty) to help build their calculator!

I just had a quick look at said calculator, but they haven't updated it yet with the newest odds so it's not representative.

[Wreckless Rat]

Quick calculation of wins in the last 12m prior to cashing mine in (about £47k) 1.6%

[Taipan]

cashed mine in... bought a plane

They're only £15 !

Bugger.... I was ripped off then.

Nah, that one has a real shit short field ability!

[Count Steer]

Got an email to say I've won something, dunno how much yet. Having a good year so far considering there's £5k in there. Keep meaning to add more but general inertia keeps getting in the way.

[Count Steer]

Got an email to say I've won something, dunno how much yet. Having a good year so far considering there's £5k in there. Keep meaning to add more but general inertia keeps getting in the way.

Woot! Another £100. That's over 4% in 2 months I think. Probably time to move the money before a long fallow spell kicks in. (There was a year where I think I got £50 so it probably averages out in the long term).

[Demannu]

2 x £75
Paid for her flights to and from blighty and a bit of duty free too boot!

[Mr Nozzle]

£100 this month

[MyLittleStudPony]

Probability has no memory. But equally, God does not play dice with the universe.

[KungFooBob]

Probability has no memory. But equally, God does not play dice with the universe.

...and the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

[Screwdriver]

Probability has no memory.

True (in a non zero sum game). Nice epithet though.

But equally, God does not play dice with the universe.

False; yes, he (she/they/it/xe) does play dice. Einstein was famously wrong about that . What makes you think you're right?

There's a lot of pointless (if you ask me) waffle about the nature of reality even if there is such a thing as "real". But the entire observable universe can be quite incredibly accurately described by one single equation: Schrödinger wave equation. That is all about probabilities, in fact in layman's terms no quantum state is determined until it is measured and until then all of reality is merely a wave of probability.

[MyLittleStudPony]

True (in a non zero sum game). Nice epithet though.

But equally, God does not play dice with the universe.

False; yes, he (she/they/it/xe) does play dice. Einstein was famously wrong about that . What makes you think you're right?

There's a lot of pointless (if you ask me) waffle about the nature of reality even if there is such a thing as "real". But the entire observable universe can be quite incredibly accurately described by one single equation: Schrödinger wave equation. That is all about probabilities, in fact in layman's terms no quantum state is determined until it is measured and until then all of reality is merely a wave of probability.

I have no idea, I just like repeating stuff which sounds cool.

That said I remain convinced there is no natural random. Every system (or the one big system as I guess things really are) is governed by the laws of physics, regardless of how well we understand them.

[Screwdriver]

I have no idea, I just like repeating stuff which sounds cool.

That said I remain convinced there is no natural random. Every system (or the one big system as I guess things really are) is governed by the laws of physics, regardless of how well we understand them.

It is a very cool epithet.

You are however wading into a deep cesspit of confusion regarding determinism. I don't mean you (honest!) I mean the entire scientific community are split on that precise point. Making such assumptions leads to various flavours of multiverse, pilot wave theory and other fantastic sounding theories to try and explain how things behave they way we are able to demonstrate they do.

Our observations are not wrong. Quantum entanglement is "a thing". A single particle can interfere with itself (steady...) if you fire it through a diffraction grating. I have struggled to understand Bells theorem only to recently discover it has been proved wrong.

It's a rabbit hole. probably best if you just accept the current accepted theory and reassure yourself that at least you are in good company. Einstein was also wrong about the probabilistic nature of reality.

More recently for example, Hawking was working on a new theory of physics "M-theory" which sounds like a bit of a cop out but proposes that physics and therefore our equations governing the behaviour of physical systems changes with scale. This in an attempt to reconcile gravity with quantum mechanics.

I could go on.

[weeksy]

Oh please do. I'm not quite asleep yet

[Yorick]

Oh please do. I'm not quite asleep yet

I knew you'd be funny one day