Ok it take a LOT to irritate me at this exact point in history that is not related to a certain orange felonious fascist. But this managed it:
I can only assume the authors of this paper are just trolling. Of course a small finite number of monkeys in a finite amount of time could not write Shakespeare. The fact they couldn’t is like the whole point of the thought experiment.
The whole point of the thought experiment is to highlight how big infinity is. An infinity is infinitely longer than the length of time until the heat depth of the universe. An infinity is infinitely longer than 10 raised to the power of the number of femtoseconds until the heat death of the universe years.
Not only will infinite monkeys type out the complete works of Shakespeare in the time it takes to type the complete works of Shakespeare they will encoded every piece of information in the entire known universe too!
This study is so so dumb. And coverage it’s getting in the mainstream press is even dumber.
Creationists abuse this too. Abiogenesis could not have happened in finite number of samples in finite amount of time where their definition of finite is on the Earth, that one time but not every cubic millimeter of every planet in the Universe, checked every quarter second.
How they gonna type with out an opposable thumb? Hunting and pecking might take infinity+.
I’m assuming in a few 1000 years we might get an episode script of Law and Order, at best.
If there’s access to TV with crappy channels on it so they can figure out the formulaic construct.
And they don’t live that long. So the skills would have to be passed down.
I read about a female Chimp who stuffed grass up her butt and all the Apes in the family group copied her. She was a popular ape I guess. Any way she’s long deceased but them Chimps still sticking grass up the ass.
Hey, anyone heard from @kayaker lately? No reason, just thought of him.
Wiki has an article on it, one that contrasts infinity and very large numbers with citations. So while the scientific paper was of some interest, it didn’t appear to change much about what was known on the topic.
However, for physically meaningful numbers of monkeys typing for physically meaningful lengths of time the results are reversed. If there were as many monkeys as there are atoms in the observable universe typing extremely fast for trillions of times the life of the universe, the probability of the monkeys replicating even a single page of Shakespeare is unfathomably small.
(really obscure reference to the same infinite monkey problem.)
People, people, the monkeys aren’t supposed to know how to type! That’s the point.
And by the time they get the full works, they’ll most likely have typed out the full works with one letter wrong. And with two letters wrong. etc etc. And the complete works, but backwards. And the compete works but shifted by one letter in every place. And all nine billion names of God.
So…would the development/invention of spellcheck help or hinder the apes? I mean, if the technology would correct, for instance, olde to old, would that hasten or delay the complete Shakespearean works?
I think this was addressed in the original thought experiment, a single immortal ape and an infinite amount of time would do if an infinite number of mortal monkeys are not available
Its also why Fermi’s “paradox” is clearly not a paradox. There are values for the terms of the equation that have perfectly plausible values where the total is <1. e.g. saying the chance of life happening on a planet is approximately the same as the chances of a particular arrangement of a shuffled deck of card is perfectly plausible, and will mean the final number is less than one.
GUILDENSTERN (musing): The law of probability, as it has been oddly asserted, is something to do with the proposition that if six monkeys (he has surprised himself) … if six monkeys were …
ROSENCRANTZ: Game?
GUILDENSTERN: Were they?
ROSENCRANTZ: Are you?
GUILDENSTERN (understanding): Game. (Flips a coin.) The law of averages, if I have got this right, means that if six monkeys were thrown up in the air for long enough they would land on their tails about as often as they would land on their -
ROSENCRANTZ: Heads. (He picks up the coin.)
GUILDENSTERN: Which at first glance does not strike one as a particularly rewarding speculation, in either sense, even without the monkeys. I mean you wouldn’t bet on it. I mean I would, but you wouldn’t …
Two Australian mathematicians have deemed it misleading, working out that even if all the chimpanzees in the world were given the entire lifespan of the universe, they would “almost certainly” never pen the works of the bard.
…
Their calculations were based on a monkey spending about 30 years typing one key a second at a keyboard with 30 keys – the letters of the English language plus some common punctuation. It found that the time it would take for a typing monkey to replicate Shakespeare’s works would be longer than the lifespan of our universe.
…
To broaden out the experiment, the Australian mathematicians turned to chimpanzees, the closest relative of humans. There are currently about 200,000 chimps on Earth, and the study presumed this population would remain stable until the end of time.
The real headline here is “Two Mathematicians Don’t Understand What Infinity Is”.
