3 ms·
What kind of "study" would this even be? I thought the point of the infinite monkey thing was to talk about regular distributions and eventualities of every pos
by tombert 2y ago
What kind of "study" would this even be? I thought the point of the infinite monkey thing was to talk about regular distributions and eventualities of every possible string showing up. I don't think anyone claimed that any relatively-long string would show up in any reasonable amount of time necessarily, but it's kind of a bizarre assertion to make.
It's sort of like stating the runtime efficiency of a Bogosort; the runtime efficiency is unbounded. Theoretically any list could be sorted on the first run, but it could also just keep sorting in an unbounded fashion for forever, though given enough time (which could be tens of trillions of years or longer), it will eventually be sorted if we assume regular distribution of random numbers.
ETA:
Ok, I read through the actual paper, and it's clearly meant more as a joke, which I don't think was made clear in this article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773186324001014 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277318632...
- atoav 2y agoI think it is even worse: infinite instances of bogosort are 100% guarantueed to finish instantly, because we are running in parallel here and the ones that are unbounded don't matter at all when at least one of then gets it right. And given the fact that there is a non-zero chance of bogosort getting it right first try, means it there are infinite bogosort instances getting it right first try. This is also true for the infinite typing monkeys: one of them is getting it right by chance, unless that chance is 0 (and it isn't).