If there were as many monkeys as there are atoms in the observable universe typing extremely fast for trillions of...

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 a single page of Shakespeare is unfathomably small.

Ignoring punctuation, spacing, and capitalisation, a monkey typing letters uniformly at random has a chance of 1 in 26 of correctly typing the first letter of Hamlet. It has a chance of 1 in 676 (26 x 26) of typing the first two letters. Because the probability shrinks exponentially, at 20 letters it already has only a chance of 1 in 26^20 = 19,928,148,895,209,409,152,340,197,376. In the case of the entire text of Hamlet, the probabilities astonishingly small, and inconceivable. The text of Hamlet contains ~130,000 letters. Thus there is a probability of 1 in 3.4 x 10^183,946 to get the text right at the first trial. The average number of letters that needs to be typed until the text appears is also 3.4 x 10183,946, or including punctuation, 4.4 x 10^360,783.

If every proton in the observable universe were a monkey with a typewriter, typing from the Big Bang until the end of the universe (when protons might no longer exist), they would need a still far greater amount of time - more than three hundred and sixty thousand orders of magnitude longer - to have a 1 in 10^500 chance of success.

For a 1 in a trillion chance of success, there would need to be 10^360,641 universes made of atomic monkeys. As Kittel and Kroemer put it in their textbook on thermodynamics, the field whose statistical foundations motivated the first known expositions of typing monkeys, "The probability of Hamlet is therefore zero in any operational sense of an event...", and stating that the monkeys must eventually succeed "gives a misleading conclusion about very, very large numbers."

There is less than a 1 in a trillion chance of success that such a universe made of monkeys could type any particular document a mere 79 characters long.

Attached: Hello.jpg (626x624, 40K)

I like you user, first thread in years that is original here.

But in this we are assuming monkeys are purely randomly pressing the keys no? They might have minimum amount of intelligence but each keystroke probability isn't the same..

>If there were as many monkeys as there are atoms in the observable universe
Then what would they be made of?

I think when they talk about the typical behaviour of monkeys, it is because they type randomly. He's trying to say that you must be very lucky to achieve a certain outcome because randomly, the chance is basically 0

Good thread op, interesting

Fffjsownen

I mean i get that but when you're pressing randomly on the keyboard, you definitely are not pressing backslash, 0-9 and other symbols with same frequencies as a-z.
A monkey would just smash on the near center of the keyboardfhdhdurbndkcmdkdnufn

It's a thought experiment you brainlet.


Also there is no feedback in this system you describe. Much like how humans coming to exist from single celled organisms is statistically impossible by chance alone.

Maybe if there was a controller who introduced rewards for typing a certain way and no reward for typing another way, you can effectively create a neural network which will improve over time.

The original argument about the typewriter monkeys is flawed to begin with yeah

yeah but it's fine because they also have an infinite amount if time so if every combination is equally likely then every combination is certain to occur eventually

Experiments can fail

>universe is infinite and has existed infinitely
>Infinite copies of Hamlet exist over an infinite amount of time
>We are just boltzmann brains around to read it
Checkmate, liberal

Why do you think they chimp out all the time instead?
If you cannot make something yourself, destroy everything until you get credit for it.

Attached: 42AA5A3D-706B-47B3-AD6B-6953471FCE02.jpg (800x445, 86K)

please stick to discord and don't bring your need for attention here tripfag

No
And no.

Imagine being such a brainlet. Christ i would have offed myself by now.

Yes and yes
Imagine being such a cocksucking faggot

Bumping good thread for ever

Straight outta pol our hero arrives

I always thought this hypothetical was stupid and misinformed, and I think I can describe why it's wrong. Basically, if you have a monkey behind a keyboard, ignoring the problem of how you're going to get it to keep typing in the first place, the sequence of key-smashes it hits, while seeming entirely random, won't be. This is because monkey brains, just like ours, are bound by unknown cognitive limits/heuristical patterns that would cause the monkeys to effectively repeat themselves after adding some number of monkeys, and you'd just end up with more of the same set of gibberish ad infinitum rather than ever producing anything close to Shakespeare.

Tldr: monkey typing over an infinite set of banana boys isn't random, it just seems that way. If this experiment was ever actually run and you had a program with infinite computational power analyze the results, it would find patterns and the monks would never make it.

the "monkey" part of the hypothetical is just a metaphor for something that endlessly produces random strings of text

gosh. Why are brainlets ruining every goddamn original thread. go to fucking facebook

Attached: drooling_neanderthal_brainlet_by_bubychub_dcwqvmf-250t.jpg (379x250, 15K)

In that case it's just a matter of scaling up the number of things that endlessly produce random strings of text and I don't see the problem. The way I've seen this formulated before has been with infinite monkeys, but if you substitute infinite monkeys for the infinite endless random text-string producers then it works and I don't see the problem.

>"ruining" a thread on shit9k by providing actual discussion
>can only manage posting a stale meme one-sentence response

Must feel pretty btfo, huh brainlet?

because the infinite endless random text-string producers are truly random unlike the monkey brains that act on predictable patterns