3 ms·
Yeah exactly, it's a thought experiment about infinities... Is someone going to publish a study concluding that Hilbert's Hotel couldn't be built on Earth too?
by kypro 2y ago
Yeah exactly, it's a thought experiment about infinities... Is someone going to publish a study concluding that Hilbert's Hotel couldn't be built on Earth too?
Why are people even spending money on this research? What are they trying to prove/disprove?
- stavros 2y ago> Why are people even spending money on this research? What are they trying to prove/disprove? That it takes much fewer than infinite humans and infinite time to produce the most pedantic paper possible.
- SalmonSnarker 2y ago> Why are people even spending money on this research? "This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors."
- dcminter 2y agoIt's just barely possible that this is not an entirely serious paper. Scientists like to have fun too, you know? Not to mention that frivolous research has been known to pay surprising dividends.
- hermitcrab 2y agoMaybe they are after an Ig Nobel prize?
- jessekv 2y agoI suspect that many academic papers are a petty move to win an argument that started one day over lunch.
- The_Blade 2y agoi disagree rabble rabble rabble rabble
- 082349872349872 2y agoFranklin Open, whatever it may be, could well have slightly higher standards than Arxiv, but it isn't exactly Nature or Science... (but try telling that to The Grauniad!)
- card_zero 2y agoPerhaps they're finitists, or ultrafinitists?
- ykonstant 2y agoMany years ago someone complimented me saying I am extra fine; your comment makes me think I'll start identifying as an extrafinitist ╰(∀)╯
- madaxe_again 2y agoAlso Zeno’s paradox is clearly untrue because Achilles would just kill the tortoise after a few days of running back and forth, starving.
- tombert 2y agoIt doesn't appear that they got any money for this, so I'm more forgiving of mathematicians just dicking around with something for fun. Still, it's a very bizarre assertion to make; it's like they're trying to debunk something that no one claimed. ETA: Maybe they were trying to prevent the Mr Burns' of the world from trying to experiment: https://youtu.be/no_elVGGgW8 https://youtu.be/no_elVGGgW8
- tines 2y agoIt's funny that so many people are confused about why this was written. The monkeys argument was originally used against the theory of evolution; "what's the probability that a monkey banging on a typewriter will type out Hamlet? It'll never happen, and that's why evolution is impossible." Then, someone made the counter-argument that given enough time, the monkey will type out Shakespeare. This paper argues that as long as the time is finite on the order of the age of our universe, the monkey will not type out Shakespeare.