These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

If Infinite Monkey Were Typing On A Computer…

Author
Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#1 - 2012-04-17 16:15:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternum Praetorian
According to current chaos theory and the principles that give us things like evolutionary theory, if you had an infinite amount of monkeys hacking away on an infinite amount of computer keyboards, eventually… you would get a line of code identical to the code that makes EVE Online possible. This is a central concept to how we view evolution, and the illusion of order born from chaos. Originally, the idea was that these monkeys could type a perfect rendition of Shakespeare or even the bible, but it can apply to anything.


Now if you ignore the fact that real monkeys would have a tendency to hack away at a certain set of keys over and over again, and if you replace them with random number generators (which are not actually random as I understand it) you will start to get the idea. So the theory has issues from go, but for the sake of using our imaginations to conceive a valid hypothesis, let's continue onward anyway.




So Here Is The Question:


If you turn a computer on and make it spit out a random sequence of 1’s and 0’s forever, will you ever get a perfect, runnable rendition of EVE online, complete with ships, bells, whistles, checks and balances? Something that you could just upload into a server and have it run without issue? Modern day science compels us believe in things like strings, branes, virtual photos and multiple dimensions, all of which are currently unobservable and thus improvable…but we are still told that they could very well be there anyway, and it is not all just pretend.

Well… this theory is allot more provable with current technology, and it directly applies to the monkey-Shakespeare theory and non-intelligent design. Even though we can never get to infinity, we can still formulate simple and accurate experiments. We can make a random number generator and let it run, and see if we ever get the code that creates a functioning version of Windows 7 (or a working equivalency). From what I know about computers and mathematics (limited as it may be) a random sequence of 1 and 0 spit out of a computer will never render a perfect rendered and functioning EVE Online as we see it today. I don’t think that you could even expect to see pong.



To me it is like saying “The value of pi must be calculable if you calculate it to infinity”.
In reality, that does not have to be true (nor does it seem to be true)

…and yet we are told otherwise when it comes theories regarding monkeys, random number generators and infinity. Why?


What do you think?

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]

Alexis Fawn Molari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2 - 2012-04-17 17:15:04 UTC
The odds of generating anything meaningful are truly staggering. Let's say you want to randomly produce a particular 140-character code to post to Twitter (yes these really exist). That's 1,120 random bits in a specific order. That means you have 2^1,120 possible outcomes, only one of which is your desired result. To put the spectrum of possibilities in better perspective, that's a 338-digit number that is well on its way to equaling the estimated number of atoms in the known universe.

If you did 10,000 random bits per second for 14 billion years, you'd have generated 3,942,000,000,000,000,000 possible combinations...assuming your randomizer never repeated a set. That's less than 2^64. It will take you another 25-30 billion years to reach 2^65.

Infinite? Yeah, you're going to need infinity to get the results you're looking for.

(if I ****ed up the math in this post, too bad. It's been a while.)
Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#3 - 2012-04-17 17:39:49 UTC
Find yourself a good sturdy wall. Brick or stone. Something that would total a truck hitting it at a moderate speed without even cracking.

Got your wall? Good. Now for the next part.

Theoretically, if you run into that wall enough times, eventually you may pass right through it.

When you pass through a solid stone wall, come back and I will answer your question.


ps: Run really really fast at the wall every time you try. Wouldn't want that one time you were going to pass through it's matter not to happen because you didn't run fast enough.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#4 - 2012-04-17 20:10:58 UTC
You know the sad truth about this? Getting a random number generator to produce EVE would still be faster than CCP's approach to game balance.
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
#5 - 2012-04-17 20:47:13 UTC
My main concern is that, according to the theory, 1000 monkeys punching wildly at keyboards will eventually make a masterpiece, but getting one eve forum user to create a coherent semi-thought out post is impossible.

Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel **IG OOPE **

Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#6 - 2012-04-17 21:08:20 UTC
Alexis Fawn Molari wrote:
The odds of generating anything meaningful are truly staggering. Let's say you want to randomly produce a particular 140-character code to post to Twitter (yes these really exist). That's 1,120 random bits in a specific order. That means you have 2^1,120 possible outcomes, only one of which is your desired result. To put the spectrum of possibilities in better perspective, that's a 338-digit number that is well on its way to equaling the estimated number of atoms in the known universe.

If you did 10,000 random bits per second for 14 billion years, you'd have generated 3,942,000,000,000,000,000 possible combinations...assuming your randomizer never repeated a set. That's less than 2^64. It will take you another 25-30 billion years to reach 2^65.

Infinite? Yeah, you're going to need infinity to get the results you're looking for.

(if I ****ed up the math in this post, too bad. It's been a while.)


Well, Thx Alexis at least, for contributing to the thread with some sense of intellectual integrity.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]

FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#7 - 2012-04-18 13:52:43 UTC
Micheal Dietrich wrote:
My main concern is that, according to the theory, 1000 monkeys punching wildly at keyboards will eventually make a masterpiece, but getting one eve forum user to create a coherent semi-thought out post is impossible.

So what you're saying is that monkeys are superior to Goons?

Because everyone in Eve is a goon alt these days. It's true, I heard it in the recruitment channel and nobody lies there.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

Whitehound
#8 - 2012-04-18 14:00:06 UTC
Infinite monkeys typing on infinite keyboards does not mean they will find infinite solutions to infinite problems. It means they will make an infinite banana requests.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2012-04-18 15:01:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Grimpak
Whitehound wrote:
Infinite monkeys typing on infinite keyboards does not mean they will find infinite solutions to infinite problems. It means they will make an infinite banana requests.

which means that we would need an infinite supply of infinite bananas to feed infinite monkeys.

infinite banana trees everywhere!Shocked










...ok that joke sounded better in my head.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right

Something Random
Byddin Un
#10 - 2012-04-18 21:41:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Something Random
OK - you say 'forever' - you mean infinity, as you spout its existance in every sentence.

YES - given infiinity, everything is possible, as a bonus itr would also create the BEST ever MMO ever. Now, isnt that nice - unless your a pathetic troll.

You have no time constraints - then you will achieve the seemingly impossible.

GUARENTEED

(EDIT) also have to say - you fail on your grasp of infinity.

"caught on fire a little bit, just a little."

"Delinquents, check, weirdos, check, hippies, check, pillheads, check, freaks, check, potheads, check .....gangs all here!"

I love Science, it gives me a Hadron.

Whitehound
#11 - 2012-04-18 23:27:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Something Random wrote:
YES - given infiinity, everything is possible, ...

No. Infinity does not make everything possible.

Imagine that you would cut time into two halves. You would have two infinite time lines, both in which everything would be possible. Now you cut each of the two time lines into more halves. You will have four time lines and each of them are still infinite and everything would still be possible in each of them. Now, if you cut these time limes further into halves and an infinite number of times, then eventually will your time lines only be as long as one second, but you would have an infinite number of time lines of one second. In other words, you have cut down time into an infinite number of seconds. As a conclusion, if everything is possible in infinite time, then everything has to be possible in only one second.

Do you believe it is possible that everything can happen in only one second?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

stoicfaux
#12 - 2012-04-19 01:41:51 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Something Random wrote:
YES - given infiinity, everything is possible, ...

No. Infinity does not make everything possible.

Imagine that you would cut time into two halves. You would have two infinite time lines, both in which everything would be possible. Now you cut each of the two time lines into more halves. You will have four time lines and each of them are still infinite and everything would still be possible in each of them. Now, if you cut these time limes further into halves and an infinite number of times, then eventually will your time lines only be as long as one second, but you would have an infinite number of time lines of one second. In other words, you have cut down time into an infinite number of seconds. As a conclusion, if everything is possible in infinite time, then everything has to be possible in only one second.

Do you believe it is possible that everything can happen in only one second?

Simpler example: the set of positive even integers is infinite. Will you ever see a negative or odd or fractional number? Nope. So infinite doesn't mean all possibilities are possible.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2012-04-19 06:35:03 UTC
Quote:
According to current chaos theory and the principles that give us things like evolutionary theory, if you had an infinite amount of monkeys hacking away on an infinite amount of computer keyboards, eventually… you would get a line of code identical to the code that makes EVE Online possible. This is a central concept to how we view evolution, and the illusion of order born from chaos. Originally, the idea was that these monkeys could type a perfect rendition of Shakespeare or even the bible, but it can apply to anything.


wait wait wait, I thought about this and... wouldn't this law also mean there was also an infinite chance none of them would ever type any of those things? Like there is infinite chance one of them will code eve online, yes. BUT there is also infinite chance none of them ever write anything since they all could write infinite nonsense!?

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-04-19 07:54:29 UTC
MotherMoon wrote:
Quote:
According to current chaos theory and the principles that give us things like evolutionary theory, if you had an infinite amount of monkeys hacking away on an infinite amount of computer keyboards, eventually… you would get a line of code identical to the code that makes EVE Online possible. This is a central concept to how we view evolution, and the illusion of order born from chaos. Originally, the idea was that these monkeys could type a perfect rendition of Shakespeare or even the bible, but it can apply to anything.


wait wait wait, I thought about this and... wouldn't this law also mean there was also an infinite chance none of them would ever type any of those things? Like there is infinite chance one of them will code eve online, yes. BUT there is also infinite chance none of them ever write anything since they all could write infinite nonsense!?



All in all it is just a silly idea since there can be no infinite monkeys. The universe, as far as we know, is limited in mass and usable time left.

And the idea to use monkeys and typewriters is just the same as having a computer generate random stuff as well.

Of course, sooner or later it will hit and match the EVE code or whatever. But what does that tell us? Nothing really, only that infinite time with random stuff will sooner or alter match a current structure.
Whitehound
#15 - 2012-04-19 10:36:52 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Simpler example: the set of positive even integers is infinite. Will you ever see a negative or odd or fractional number? Nope. So infinite doesn't mean all possibilities are possible.

This is not the point. The thought was that infinity solves problems and makes everything possible. A number alone, if negative or positive is just a number. The question is if you believe anything is possible within only one second?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Eternum Praetorian
Doomheim
#16 - 2012-04-19 12:48:26 UTC
lahluhq;rihjw;kldjaoshjn'a;HF;OAHFNSDBFHJASB,BASD,.JHA;hkBJ,HAB,JDFBHAJ,DBADJ,ABD.,NR;OIEWQHJJASNDKJolwup98rup23hjlwihfdqilwhnrflwy8fcnm;oweyrwiln.AHSN.,AH;WOIJRNKJ.WHG;DOIAJNJDKGHASLIOHNEJHGL,IAUHKSBJSDAGHJKSDBLUIFHEWURO;IHNFLJKSAGHBFJSC,.NXZ.CJASN.FIHIOURHWELIUHYF;OEWYHUIUASHF;LUISAHNFHJSDBFJ,ASHGFJBSDHGokeup85u0w5u8ijlisfnwjkeyp9uj.kjwsdyf89oijlk;ewfjo'we8u743o;ijkn;soufoisj.asjfklhsdj.reoi;tuwpojr'q9;ifjklksdj;foisdjf.;iaojkr8';[4wiokn;sdiofj




The theory that gives us the idea of "parrallel universes" relys on the principle that complex patterns will enevitably repeat if you have 1. an unlimited amount of time and 2. a finite amount of variables. I however disagree. There is no reason to think that the above would inevitably become Hamlet given enough time and space, it is just as likely that it would remain a string of jumble for all eternity.


Complex order should not be considered the enevitable outcome of super-randomness.

[center]The EVE Gateway Blog[/center] [center]One Of EVE Online's Ultimate Resources[/center]

Pr1ncess Alia
Doomheim
#17 - 2012-04-19 16:57:49 UTC
Eternum Praetorian wrote:

Well, Thx Alexis at least, for contributing to the thread with some sense of intellectual integrity.

What if up were down and down were up?

Ask a stupid question.....
Jno Aubrey
Galactic Patrol
#18 - 2012-04-19 17:08:27 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Something Random wrote:
YES - given infiinity, everything is possible, ...

No. Infinity does not make everything possible.

Imagine that you would cut time into two halves. You would have two infinite time lines, both in which everything would be possible. Now you cut each of the two time lines into more halves. You will have four time lines and each of them are still infinite and everything would still be possible in each of them. Now, if you cut these time limes further into halves and an infinite number of times, then eventually will your time lines only be as long as one second, but you would have an infinite number of time lines of one second. In other words, you have cut down time into an infinite number of seconds. As a conclusion, if everything is possible in infinite time, then everything has to be possible in only one second.

Do you believe it is possible that everything can happen in only one second?



I rate this post at 10 monkeys, 20 minutes.

Name a shrub after me.  Something prickly and hard to eradicate.

Lord Dravius
Doomheim
#19 - 2012-04-19 20:05:04 UTC
On a long enough timeline it's inevitable. It would probably take 30,000 years before the stars aligned just right, but in theory it would happen eventually.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#20 - 2012-04-20 07:37:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Eternum Praetorian wrote:
According to current chaos theory and the principles that give us things like evolutionary theory, if you had an infinite amount of monkeys hacking away on an infinite amount of computer keyboards [...] a central concept to how we view evolution, and the illusion of order born from chaos [...] yet we are told otherwise when it comes theories regarding monkeys, random number generators and infinity. Why?
[...]
The theory that gives us the idea of "parrallel universes" relys on the principle that complex patterns will enevitably repeat if you have 1. an unlimited amount of time and 2. a finite amount of variables. I however disagree. There is no reason to think that the above would inevitably become Hamlet given enough time and space, it is just as likely that it would remain a string of jumble for all eternity. Complex order should not be considered the enevitable outcome of super-randomness.

Actually, for the first section, I think you are either interpreting evolutionary theory (and possibly chaos theory) wrong, or you are repeating something you heard from somebody who misunderstood it. You do get it somewhat right in the end of the second part though.
Also, I don't get why you have to bring chaos theory into the mix anyway. It's not like it's all that relevant in this particular context. And anyway, chaos theory is basically just a fancy way of saying "very complex systems tend to sometimes yield radically different results depending on even tiny variations in initial conditions" (and chaos theory heavily deals with studies of the "result clouds" based on possible initial conditions).

Like somebody else already pointed out, the chance to randomly spit out a specific full-length twitter post by using random valid characters would take so much longer than the age of the universe - although, you probably want to limit yourself to just lower case letters and a few punctuation signs, so that goes down to 700 bits, or a number with "only" 210 digits, and you might want to use a huge array of computers (let's say google's 1++ mil computer network) spitting out hundreds of millions of results per second each, but that's still only an additional 10 digits down, not much of a dent there.

So let's put it this way - evolution does NOT work by completely random arrangements. If it DID work that way, the chance ANY life would exist anywhere in the universe would be pretty darn low, and the chance of something as complex as humans ever evolving would be closer to zero than anything you can even imagine.
Evolution works by SMALL random INCREMENTAL changes which generally trend towards increasing the "fitness" of something (i.e. chance of that thing resulting in the generation and/or maintenance of more of -more or less- the same thing). The "thing" doesn't even really need to be "alive" per se (not necessarily anyway) to have (at least some of) those criteria apply.

Get the same monkeys on the typewriters - you know what, scratch that, get a SINGLE monkey on a SINGLE typewriter - and have a human observer around to act as a "force of (not so natural) selection". The monkey gets to RANDOMLY pick a few letters and a few spots to put them in, generating a few variations of an initially random string ; the human will then decide whichever one of the results "looks more like" a specific tweet (or any tweet), then repeat the whole process with the starting point being the chosen "most like a tweet" string.
And guess what - instead of taking many times the age of the universe to get a decent result, it will probably take just days, or even just hours.
Granted, that's not the best example for evolution (it's artificial, not natural selection - but in the end, it's ANY selection that matters, not exactly what the nature of the selection might be), but it's an example built upon the initial one, making it make more sense.

You would not be able to realistically get even a short joke from an army of monkeys randomly typing on typewriters, let alone the complete works of Shakespeare, just like you will never be able to realistically get even something resembling pong by randomly stringing bits together.
But you WILL be able to get even a complete short story within a lifetime by applying some form of artificial selection, and you MIGHT get a crude video game -like code eventually if you used some clever selection techniques (like, say, having a "genome" that encoded valid and growing programming text and fed it to a compiler then you manually select something that looks like it gives some result and so on).

TL;DR ?

Evolution is not total randomness - actually, almost the exact opposite of it, basically : it's the constant REMOVAL of huge amounts of randomness due to incremental adaptations to current and ever-shifting conditions.
Or something to that extent.
123Next pageLast page