Infinite Monkeys

| 2 Comments | View blog reactions

I thought that everyone understood the principles behind the idea that given time and typewriters, an infinite number of monkeys would produce the complete works of Shakespeare. Of course you either need an infinite number of monkeys or an infinite amount of time. But it's obvious, I hope, that given one of those two conditions Shakespeare will be written. It's a thought experiment. Impossible to do in the real world.

But it seems this logic is lost on some people. A group in Paignton Zoo decided to test the hypothesis. So they set up six monkeys with typewriters for a month. They got a grant from the Arts Council to do it.

And, of course, they didn't even get a complete word. The Zoo's scientific officer Dr Amy Plowman said that the experiment shows that "the 'infinite monkey' theory is flawed." Did you notice the word "scientific" in her job title? Not sure how that got there as she seems to be incapable of logical thought.

Now excuse me, I'm just off to spend the weekend staying in Hilbert's Hotel.

2 Comments

> But it's obvious, I hope, that given one of
> those two conditions Shakespeare will be written.

I diagree, there's no proof there whatsoever. It would only be true if the monkeys hit keys randomly. But they don't. Maybe monkeys have some natural inherient dislike of good old Bill which prevents them from writing it.

Why don't they just do it Perl?

http://www.suttree.uklinux.net/code/EnoughMonkeys/

Mmmm....Perl :)

Leave a comment

About this Entry About this Site

This page contains a single entry by Dave Cross published on May 9, 2003 1:58 PM.

English as She is Spoke was the previous entry in this blog.

Priorities is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Archives

OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID
Powered by Movable Type 4.23-en

Recent Comments

  • duncan: Why don't they just do it Perl? http://www.suttree.uklinux.net/code/EnoughMonkeys/ Mmmm....Perl :) read more
  • Mark Fowler: > But it's obvious, I hope, that given one of read more