  This question is raised by Cason, Friedman and Hopkins (CFH, 2012) after they
firstly found and indexed quantitatively the cycles in a continuous time
experiment. To answer this question, we use the data from standard RPS
experiment. Our experiments are of the traditional setting - in each of
repeated rounds, the subjects are paired with random matching, using pure
strategy and must choose simultaneously, and after each round, each subject
obtains only private information. This economics environment is a decartelized
and low-information one.
  Using the cycle rotation indexes (CRI, developed by CFH) method, we find, the
cycles not only exist but also persist in our experiment. Meanwhile, the
cycles' direction are consistent with 'standard' learning models. That is the
answer to the CHF question: Cycles do not dissipate in the simultaneously
choose game.
  In addtion, we discuss three questions (1) why significant cycles are uneasy
to be obtained in traditional setting experiments; (2) why CRI can be an iconic
indexing-method for 'standard' evolution dynamics; and (3) where more cycles
could be expected.
