• ItsAFake@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    10 months ago

    What happens if they write the communist manifesto before any works of Shakespeare?

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s not literal.

    It’s a way to explain that any result is possible.

    Like, throw some matter/energy in any closed system, and eventually, everything and anything possible will happen on an infinite timeline.

    So sure, 99.9999999999999999% are going to poop on it, but on an infinite scale, you’d get Shakespeare

    • Urist@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Well no. You can try to count every real number forever and you will miss infinitely many still. Some infinites are larger than others, hence I do not see any reason why “infinite time” would cover “every possibility happening”. On the other hand, if you do have a mathematical proof you could refer to, I would be most grateful.

      EDIT: To write out my example, let us consider a machine that picks a random number between 3 and 4 every second. Then there is every second a nonzero chance that this machine (assuming true and not pseudo randomness) will pick, say pi. The range of numbers picked constitute the image of a function from the whole numbers to the real numbers (up to isomporphism), which cannot be surjective. Hence there are numbers not picked even though there was a > 0 chance of picking them every second for an infinite time.

      • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        Then there is every second a nonzero chance that this machine (assuming true and not pseudo randomness) will pick, say pi.

        No. The probability of picking any particular number from a uniform distribution is 0.

        On the contrary, since the works of Shakespeare are a finite string over a finite alphabet (I can formalize this argument if you want), the probability of typing them out after some fixed large number of keystrokes is some nonzero number 𝑝. With 𝑛 monkeys, the probability that at least one will type out the works is 1 − (1 − 𝑝)ⁿ, which goes to 1 as 𝑛 → ∞.

        Now, you are right that this does not mean that the works are guaranteed to be typed out. However, it has probability 1, so it’s mathematically “almost certain”.

      • Dran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t think I understand your example but I feel like people downvoting you without arguing the math is something that should be left to twitter and reddit.

        • Urist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          Thanks. It was a bit poorly worded, but I do think the original statement is wrong and just wanted to sketch an idea of why.

      • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Even funnier in your example is that the chance of any real number ever being picked is infinitesimally small, instead of guaranteed.

        • Urist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Yep! Relatively speaking almost none of them will be picked. The same is also true even if one had a countable infinite amount of machines trying to pick these numbers.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I hear what you are saying and agree. I never took the monkey Shakespeare theory seriously. It sounded a bit too poppy and quite honestly the guy that told me was a douche and pronounced giblets wrong. But as a theory you could get anything in a long enough time span and infinite amount of resources. Why or how that matters? Well I just don’t see it.

        • Urist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Of course I am not denying that anything possible could happen. That is contradictory to the assumption it was possible in the first place. What I am saying is just that not all that is possible will happen, even if given an infinite time to do so.

          EDIT: Unfortunately, given a setup like this the math says monkey Shakespeare will almost surely happen due to there only being finite variations.

    • Neato@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Infinite, sure. But the universe doesn’t have infinite. There are SO many english words that just putting them together randomly it’s still effectively impossible to generate a work of Shakespear.

      And even with as much tech as we can imagine, the universe is finite to our reach and especially to our time. The odds of randomly generating Shakespear is so low even using a processor the size of the sun, the heat death of the universe might happen first. It’s theoretically possible, but so is a planet that spontaneously generates made of nothing but cheddar cheese.

    • Kalkaline @lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      One day someone is going to open their dryer and all their laundry is going to land perfectly folded based on that same theory. Maybe it is possible, but incredibly unlikely and even if it did happen you’d probably miss that particular revolution of the dryer.

  • ZephrC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    A finite number of monkeys would almost certainly just destroy their finite number of typewriters long before they randomly bashed out anything coherent, let alone Shakespeare. Infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters don’t have that problem though. As long as it doesnt break the laws of physics it would eventually happen, no matter how unlikely it is. That’s the whole point.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    This raises an interesting question: Do other primates even have the same anatomy to get carpal tunnel? It’s just an inflammation of tissue in a very narrow part of the wrist that puts pressure on a nerve. Do monkies even have the same kind of tissues in the same narrow passage to get inflamed enough that it causes pressure on a nerve that gives mobility issues to their hands?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Reddit is less creative than it is distributive. Terrible place for original content, but a reliable location to find reposts of trending material produced elsewhere.

      If you’re looking for a real “10,000 monkeys on typewriters” situation, you’d be better off trolling through Tumblr or DeviantArt or 4chan.

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        It was more of an attempt at a joke. But the comments on reddit are rather close to the infinite monkey situation. While you are absolutely right that 4chan might be even closer. But 4chan is too hardcore for me, so I kind of forgot about it.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          the comments on reddit are rather close to the infinite monkey situation

          Damn, I wish they were that creative. I feel like there’s maybe 30 different predefined Reddit Comments that just get randomly spat out by a generator ever few minutes.

          But 4chan is too hardcore for me, so I kind of forgot about it.

          Fair. But nothing recreates the experience of a dozen chimps throwing shit at one another like 4chan.

    • jeffw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Always thought this was BS and Wikipedia confirms my assumption:

      In 2002, lecturers and students from the University of Plymouth MediaLab Arts course used a £2,000 grant from the Arts Council to study the literary output of real monkeys. They left a computer keyboard in the enclosure of six Celebes crested macaques in Paignton Zoo in Devon, England from May 1 to June 22, with a radio link to broadcast the results on a website. Not only did the monkeys produce nothing but five total pages largely consisting of the letter “S”, the lead male began striking the keyboard with a stone, and other monkeys followed by urinating and defecating on the machine.

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    You don’t actually need infinite time if you have infinite monkeys with typewriters. If the typing is truly random, one of the moneys will type the complete works of Shakespeare on the first try. Or maybe infinitely many will, but then you start having to reason about different sizes of infinity.

    • misterundercoat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      In pretty sure it would involve a hierarchy based on which monkeys are best at beating other monkeys to death with typewriters.