From: Jonathan de Boyne Pollard on
>
>>
>> How far is this theorem true? Has any monkey proved this now?
>>
> Well, instead of using a single monkey, giving it infinite time, you
> can use a large number of monkeys for a shorter time.
>
.... because, as we all know, infinity divided by a finite number is ...
erm ... finite and ... erm ... smaller.

Robert Wilensky is proven right by this very thread.

From: Nick Keighley on
On 8 Mar, 14:44, jellybean stonerfish <stonerf...(a)geocities.com>
wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:56:54 -0800, Nick Keighley wrote:

> > shakespere didn't generate his plays by random means.
>
> It was random that there even was a Shakespeare.

only if you use an odd definition of "random"
From: Jongware on
On 10-Mar-10 11:29 AM, Nick Keighley wrote:
> On 8 Mar, 14:44, jellybean stonerfish<stonerf...(a)geocities.com>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:56:54 -0800, Nick Keighley wrote:
>
>>> shakespere didn't generate his plays by random means.
>>
>> It was random that there even was a Shakespeare.
>
> only if you use an odd definition of "random"

Well, I disagree. Given the number of permutations of his parents'
genes, and those of his grandparents, etc., it's a downright miracle
there ever was a Shakespeare. And he landed in just the right time, too
-- we will never know if there was a very good Neanderthal playwright
because they didn't write.

But don't feel depressed; the odds of YOUR existence were just as slim,
and yet the universe pulled that one off.

[Jw]
From: pete on
Karthik Balaguru wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I came across the 'Infinite Monkey Theorem'.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem
>
> I wonder how can a monkey hitting keys at random on
> a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will
> almost surely type a given text, such as the complete
> works of William Shakespeare ? And why was
> monkey chosen to convey this theorem ?
>
> How far is this theorem true ? Has any monkey
> proved this now :-) ??

The monkey is supposed to represent a random text generator,
which is capable of generating any text.
The infinite amount of time, is a condition which can not be met.

(A) And (Not A), Implies (B).

--
pete
From: jellybean stonerfish on
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:29:05 -0800, Nick Keighley wrote:

> On 8 Mar, 14:44, jellybean stonerfish <stonerf...(a)geocities.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:56:54 -0800, Nick Keighley wrote:
>
>> > shakespere didn't generate his plays by random means.
>>
>> It was random that there even was a Shakespeare.
>
> only if you use an odd definition of "random"

I used a pseudo-random definition of random.