1000 monkeys at 1000 computers typing randomly for infinite time...

[theGOOCH]

Here is your problem. You keep misunderstanding infinity.

No, sorry. I simply said infinity is infinity. You're forgetting the "there's no such thing" part. Who cares if there have been infinite conversations in the past?

At least the other guy gave a little food for thought. Your responses are just silly.

...and since credentials are so important to you.. if you are a PhD in philosophy and mathematics (specializing in probability) I'll take your word over my source

 

[theGOOCH]

In other words, he agreed with me.

It seems you hear what you want to hear

 

[Proteinboy]

theGOOCH;199527]How in the world does that make me wrong?

its easy. you said it would create every combination of text possible. and it wont. therefore, you are wrong.

My terminology may have been awkward saying "every possible combination" since there isn't a finite number, but it still doesn't prove your point.

of course it doesnt prove my point. i already made my statement about why i am correct, which you made no attempt at dissproving. you simply stated what you and many others have already posted. therefore i was disproving your point by saying you are wrong and why.

There is no such thing as one infinity being longer than another.

an infinite entity is not measured in length.

you do not understand that the generator can very well go on forever just typing letter mash and not come up with anything significantly close to hamlet.

 

[theGOOCH]

you are wrong.
there is an infinite number of conversations that can be spoken and an infinite combination of letters that can be combined to create an infinite number of texts that could have been written in the past; which as far as we know could have been infinite years back in the infinity of the universe in which every being in the universe creating different works of text.

Protein Boy,

You almost had me convinced for a minute. I was just thinking about part of your response. I think the part about past writings are irrelevant, but the idea that since the combinations characters being typed are infinite it would never have to conform to one given sequence.

but...there is a finite number characters in each specific book therefore a finite number of combinations (a huge number of course, but finite.) So if you looked at the random characters in blocks the same number as the number of characters in the book, those combinations would also be finite. So it still seems to me therefore in infinite time a block of those characters being generated would have to conform eventually.

It has been said that I don't understand the concept of infinity. The truth is no one really does. It is by design a theoretical, non-tangible concept. Something that seems so simple becomes incredibly complex when dealing with the idea of infinity.

The same is true of time travel. Einstein said it was theoretically possible. There are some really crazy scenarios you can think up with that.

I don't believe it's as cut and dry as I originally thought or as either side still thinks. That's why this "imponderable " has been around for so long.

No hard feelings to anyone...I sort of enjoyed this.

 

[drseuss]

What if it was 1000 of those pirate monkeys (Jack) from Pirates of the Caribbean?

What if each of monkey actually held a PhD in mathematical theory?

What if just *one* of monkey was a direct descendent of Shakespeare?

Really....what if????

 

[theGOOCH]

an infinite entity is not measured in length.

You are actually agreeing with what I said there. Apparently I failed to convey what I was saying clearly

 

[Proteinboy]

a random character generator does not take into account whether or not a book has a finite number of characters.
showing that every book has a finite number of characters does not prove it will be eventaully produced.
there are infinite numbers of other strings and combos that the generator could create forever without producing a given text.

 

[drseuss]

a random character generator does not take into account whether or not a book has a finite number of characters.
showing that every book has a finite number of characters does not prove it will be eventaully produced.
there are infinite numbers of other strings and combos that the generator could create forever without producing a given text.

And that is precisely why this either would or would not happen given the monkey, text, time, and creativity variables.

 

[theGOOCH]

a random character generator does not take into account whether or not a book has a finite number of characters.
showing that every book has a finite number of characters does not prove it will be eventaully produced.
there are infinite numbers of other strings and combos that the generator could create forever without producing a given text.

I edited my post since then...check it and respond to the rest

If you take a block of that generated text, say 10,000 characters. There is a finite number of combinations of characters since there is a finite number of keys

 

[Proteinboy]

You are actually agreeing with what I said there. Apparently I failed to convey what I was saying clearly

yes. since you said that because the generator would continue to produce random code for an infinite amount of time, you think that it will also produce every combination of characters even though there are infinite combinations.

but it wont.

 

[Proteinboy]

If you take a block of that generated text, say 10,000 characters. There is a finite number of combinations of characters since there is a finite number of keys

how would the words be seperated from one another? the space bar would have to be used. sorry, it doesnt space itself magically . a space is not a character. therefore, there are infinite ways to space 10,000 characters. i will explain below.

given the space bar has the same probability of any other key.

you can have "a (followed by 99^1193948 spaces) b(followed by X spaces) c (followed by X spaces)" continue that for 10,000 characters. there can be an infinite number of spaces in between any given letter. there also can be random spaces where they are not supposed to be. and on the other hand, there can be no spaces ever generated whatsoever.

sorry, but hamlet has spaces.

notice, i didnt even mention the backspace key.

there are infinite ways for these 1000 generators to go on forever without creating hamlet...

 

[Woodt]

PB, seriously. Every argument has been addressed. I don't think we can possibly get to the bottom of this. On these formulas you could argue that...

When keys get typed in any particular order, they x by 26 as the probability for each one. The backspace key is not designed to be big, it's designed to be accessible, but not a problem. Therefore the monkeys would hit it less times than the average key, presuming they just looked down at the keyboard and hit keys in the middle. Basic scenario.

seven letters are written, these are:
a,g,q,y,l,c,space bar. Already the mistake has been made. To then get the odds of going back to zero letters with the space bar are incredibly slim. Eventually, by logic the letters would build up into the thousands, and there is no possible way that the spacebar would then be hit 1000 times in a row. Think about it. So the story could be written with words round it, like I've said. But not with nothing else around it.

 

[theGOOCH]

how would the words be seperated from one another? the space bar would have to be used. a space is not a character. there are infinite ways to space 10,000 characters.

given the space bar has the same probability of any other key.

you can have "a (followed by 99^1193948 spaces) b(followed by X spaces) c (followed by X spaces)" continue that for 10,000 characters. there can be an infinite number of spaces in between any given letter. there also can be random spaces where they are not supposed to be. and on the other hand, there can be no spaces ever generated whatsoever.

sorry, but hamlet has spaces.

notice, i didnt even mention the backspace key.

there are infinite ways for these 1000 generators to go on forever without creating hamlet...

I'm counting every key as a "character" and yes, there is still a finite number. Being a space bar makes it no different. There cannot be an infinite number of spaces between each letter because I am considering a space a character

 

[Proteinboy]

I'm counting every key as a "character"

but the generator does not care or know how many characters it is producing. it randomly produces the letters and it is luck whether or not the spaces are in the perfect spots. there can still be infinite number of spaces in between each letter. or no spaces at all, eliminating every chance of it ever being created by that generator.

regardless of your above situation which you created, this still proves the original point.
the generator doesnt relate anything to 10,000 characters or the number of ways it can type 10,000 characters. i dont know why you even brought it up. this entire statement:

"how would the words be seperated from one another? the space bar would have to be used. sorry, it doesnt space itself magically . a space is not a character. therefore, there are infinite ways to space 10,000 characters. i will explain below.

given the space bar has the same probability of any other key.

you can have "a (followed by 99^1193948 spaces) b(followed by X spaces) c (followed by X spaces)" continue that for 10,000 characters. there can be an infinite number of spaces in between any given letter. there also can be random spaces where they are not supposed to be. and on the other hand, there can be no spaces ever generated whatsoever.

sorry, but hamlet has spaces.

notice, i didnt even mention the backspace key.

there are infinite ways for these 1000 generators to go on forever without creating hamlet..."

still relates to the original post about 1000 random generators attempting to re create hamlet

No hard feelings to anyone...I sort of enjoyed this.

:yelrotflmao: yea i completely agree. its just a silly, controversial conversation

 

[theGOOCH]

\ there can still be infinite number of spaces in between each letter. or no spaces at all, eliminating every chance of it ever being created by that generator.

No their can't. Not within a specific sample (like the 10,000 characters, or let's say "keystrokes" because the space is part of that count.)

The generator may have no concept of how many characters there are, but that doesn't stop us from examining finite samples

 

[Proteinboy]

wait...why do you keep on bringing up 10,000 characters like it will prove something?

we can examine as many finite samples as we want. doesnt change anything about how to generator will operate and generate infinitely.

try to grasp how there are infinite ways NOT to create hamlet.

 

[theGOOCH]

wait...why do you keep on bringing up 10,000 characters like it will prove something?

we can examine as many finite samples as we want. doesnt change anything about how to generator will operate and generate infinitely.

try to grasp how there are infinite ways NOT to create hamlet.

You aren't attempting to disprove what I said. Within a finite set of characters within the generated characters there is a finite number of combinations. Who cares what is typed before and after we just care that a certain number of characters matches the book.

Let me re-word this: You say there is an infinite number of combinations the generator can type which is true, but only because the number of characters it types is infinite. If I'm saying a particular book has 10,000 characters and we are looking for a match in the generated characters we would be continually looking for sets of 10,000 consecutive characters to see if it matched. Within that number of characters there is a finite number of ways they could be arranged.
Given that the generator is generating characters at random, one of these consecutive groups will eventually "almost certainly" match

Repeating again that there are infinite combinations going on for eternity doesn't confront this issue.

 

[Tanizaki]

It seems you hear what you want to hear

What I read was his statement that his background in statistics did not qualify him regarding this discussion, which is the bailiwick of probability.

 

[Tanizaki]

It has been said that I don't understand the concept of infinity. The truth is no one really does. It is by design a theoretical, non-tangible concept. Something that seems so simple becomes incredibly complex when dealing with the idea of infinity.

This is a nice dodge, but inaccurate. While you can't understand it, many others do. Something that is non-tangible is not beyond comprehension.

The same is true of time travel. Einstein said it was theoretically possible. There are some really crazy scenarios you can think up with that.

I have no idea what this is all about.

I don't believe it's as cut and dry as I originally thought or as either side still thinks. That's why this "imponderable " has been around for so long.

No hard feelings to anyone...I sort of enjoyed this.

Bye bye!

 

[Tanizaki]

And that is precisely why this either would or would not happen given the monkey, text, time, and creativity variables.

This is a tautology. "Either it will or will not happen"? No way!

Flying by flapping my arms either will or will not happen.
A plaid aardvark emerging from a mountain spring either will or will not happen.
The sun turning into a giant taco either will or will not happen.

You can do this all day long!