this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
1175 points (98.8% liked)

Science Memes

11946 readers
1608 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Back in my IT support days, IPX routing had a "Count to Infinity" problem when the number of hops between sites went above 15. We used to joke that this made 16 "Infinity".

Being nerds at the time, we did napkin math to prove the Shakespearian Monkey Quotient was 256cmy (combined monkey years) for "Hamlet".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

But monkeys never ask questions.

Science has yet to determine if monkeys would be able to type "wherefore art thou Romeo?"

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago

infinite monkey theorem relies on the assumption that infinite banana theorem is valid

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago
[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 months ago (4 children)

What part of Infinity is a mathematician, of all people, failing to comprehend? So what if it takes until cosmological decade 1,000 or 1 million or 1mil⁹⁰⁰⁰, it's still possible on an infinite timescale, of one could devise a way for it all to survive the heat death of the universe ad infinitum.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

I have read the paper, the news make it seem like something that is not. It's a tough experiment and mostly a joke. From the paper closing remarks:

Given plausible estimates of the lifespan of the universe and the amount of possible monkey typists available, this still leaves huge orders of magnitude differences between the resources available and those required for non-trivial text generation. As such, we have to conclude that Shakespeare himself inadvertently provided the answer as to whether monkey labour could meaningfully be a replacement for human endeavour as a source of scholarship or creativity. To quote Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 3, Line 87: “No”.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I'm not terribly bright, but I've never understood the original statement.

If I bash my right hand on a typewriter an infinite number of times, that will never turn into the complete works of Shakespeare. If we assume a monkey will enter one random letter at a time, that probably would, but that is a big assumption that a monkey would be actually random.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Hell, infinite monkeys over a finite amount of time or finite monkeys over an infinite amount of time does the trick.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

I was about to say...

An infinite amount of monkeys could (depending on how you make the rules) write Shakespeare within a second.

if each monkey just has to type one letter on a page and you just take a group of monkeys in a long line and you read each letter on the line you would read Shakespeare. It would be done in a second.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It's also possible that it's not possible even on an infinite time scale. A quick example: if you asked an algorithm to choose a number, and you choose 6536639876555721, but the algorithm only chooses from the infinite number of even numbers, it will never choose your number. So for the monkeys, if they are just not 'programmed' to ever be able to write a whole Shakespeare play, they will not be able to even with infinite time and infinite moneys.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (3 children)

The "Infinite monkey theorem" concerns itself with Probability (the mathematical field). It has been mathematically proven that given the random input (the mathematical kind - not the human-created kind) of the monkeys, and the infinite time, the probability of the "complete works of William Shakespeare" rolling out of the typewriter in between the other random output is 1.

It's a mathematical theorem that just uses monkeys to speak to the imagination, not a practical exercise, other than to prove the maths.

You should look into another brain-breaking probability problem called the "Monty Hall Problem". Note that some of the greatest mathematical minds of the time failed said puzzle. Switching 100% increases the chance of winning. No, it won't guarantee a win, but it will increase your chances, mathematically.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Disagree. Within the confines of the thought experiment the monkeys are working with the standard alphabet and punctuation. There's no reason to assume that they would never use the letter t or something like that, especially given the infinite time scale.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I see what you're saying, but I do think they would have behavioral 'rules' that would stop them even on an infinite time scale. It would work if monkeys were capable of pressing one letter at a time, walking away, and pressing another letter and so forth... and while that's of course physically possible for the monkeys to do, I don't think it's actually possible because they are susceptible to their own behavior. Not saying they would never type one specific letter, but a better example would be the behavior of rolling their finger/hand while pressing a letter, such that a conglomeration of letters are pressed in a way that would never match a Shakespeare play.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (7 children)

The problem is that you're underestimating infinity then. If it only happens 1 in 1000000000000^10000 times but there's an infinite number of attempts over an infinite amount of tine, it's still bound to happen eventually.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Except for (cosmic-) bitflips and/or evolution changing the programming

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Still stuck on step 1. Get infinite monkeys.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

We're gonna need a bigger sedan...

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›