This reminds me of observations some have when looking at the I Ching.

The I Ching is elegant from a modern binary/math perspective because it appears to be an ancient hierarchy of 1-bit symbols (yin/yang), stacked into 3-bit symbols (triagram=element), and finally stacked into 6-bit symbols (hexagram). These are, apparently, descriptions of situations at hand or situations to come. The arrangements of these 64 hexagrams make a modern math mind speculate about binary counting and the reason for a particular ordering [1] and it all seems very orderly and balanced and evenly distributed. Or so you would think.

Then one learns that the traditional methods of division using those 64 hexagrams (e.g. the yarrow stalk method) is quite unevenly distributed. The dice are weighted, so to speak, to give some outcomes more often than others.[2]

Did the Chinese ancients know this and design it this way? Did they care? Was it a mistake? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[1] https://www.biroco.com/yijing/sequence.htm

[2] https://aleadeum.com/2013/07/12/the-i-ching-random-numbers-a...