fatter
Your honour, top 5 reason why me innocntet:
- i did like uhhh the sexy pensi sex with your mom
- sexksss
- The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type any given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare. In fact, the monkey would almost surely type every possible finite text an infinite number of times. However, the probability that monkeys filling the entire observable universe would type a single complete work, such as Shakespeare’s Hamlet , is so tiny that the chance of it occurring during a period of time hundreds of thousands of orders of magnitude longer than the age of the universe is extremely low (but technically not zero). The theorem can be generalized to state that any sequence of events which has a non-zero probability of happening, at least as long as it hasn’t occurred, will almost certainly eventually occur.
In this context, “almost surely” is a mathematical term meaning the event happens with probability 1, and the “monkey” is not an actual monkey, but a metaphor for an abstract device that produces an endless random sequence of letters and symbols. One of the earliest instances of the use of the “monkey metaphor” is that of French mathematician Émile Borel in 1913,[1] but the first instance may have been even earlier.
Variants of the theorem include multiple and even infinitely many typists, and the target text varies between an entire library and a single sentence. Jorge Luis Borges traced the history of this idea from Aristotle’s On Generation and Corruption and Cicero’s De Natura Deorum (On the Nature of the Gods), through Blaise Pascal and Jonathan Swift, up to modern statements with their iconic simians and typewriters. In the early 20th century, Borel and Arthur Eddington used the theorem to illustrate the timescales implicit in the foundations of statistical mechanics.
Solution
Direct proof
There is a straightforward proof of this theorem. As an introduction, recall that if two events are statistically independent, then the probability of both happening equals the product of the probabilities of each one happening independently. For example, if the chance of rain in Moscow on a particular day in the future is 0.4 and the chance of an earthquake in San Francisco on any particular day is 0.00003, then the chance of both happening on the same day is 0.4 × 0.00003 = 0.000012, assuming that they are indeed independent.
Consider the probability of typing the word banana on a typewriter with 50 keys. Suppose that the keys are pressed randomly and independently, meaning that each key has an equal chance of being pressed regardless of what keys had been pressed previously. The chance that the first letter typed is ‘b’ is 1/50, and the chance that the second letter typed is ‘a’ is also 1/50, and so on. Therefore, the probability of the first six letters spelling banana is
(1/50) × (1/50) × (1/50) × (1/50) × (1/50) × (1/50) = (1/50)6 = 1/15,625,000,000.
Less than one in 15 billion, but not zero.
From the above, the chance of not typing banana in a given block of 6 letters is 1 − (1/50)6. Because each block is typed independently, the chance X n of not typing banana in any of the first n blocks of 6 letters is
{\displaystyle X_{n}=\left(1-{\frac {1}{50^{6}}}\right)^{n}.}
As n grows, X n gets smaller. For n = 1 million, X n is roughly 0.9999, but for n = 10 billion X n is roughly 0.53 and for n = 100 billion it is roughly 0.0017. As n approaches infinity, the probability X n approaches zero; that is, by making n large enough, X n can be made as small as is desired,[2] and the chance of typing banana approaches 100%.[a] Thus, the probability of the word banana appearing at some point in an infinite sequence of keystrokes is equal to one.
The same argument applies if we replace one monkey typing n consecutive blocks of text with n monkeys each typing one block (simultaneously and independently). In this case, X n = (1 − (1/50)6) n is the probability that none of the first n monkeys types banana correctly on their first try. Therefore, at least one of infinitely many monkeys will ( with probability equal to one ) produce a text as quickly as it would be produced by a perfectly accurate human typist copying it from the original.
Infinite strings
This can be stated more generally and compactly in terms of strings, which are sequences of characters chosen from some finite alphabet:
- Given an infinite string where each character is chosen uniformly at random, any given finite string almost surely occurs as a substring at some position.
- Given an infinite sequence of infinite strings, where each character of each string is chosen uniformly at random, any given finite string almost surely occurs as a prefix of one of these strings.
Both follow easily from the second Borel–Cantelli lemma. For the second theorem, let E k be the event that the k th string begins with the given text. Because this has some fixed nonzero probability p of occurring, the E k are independent, and the below sum diverges,
{\displaystyle \sum {k=1}^{\infty }P(E{k})=\sum _{k=1}^{\infty }p=\infty ,}
the probability that infinitely many of the E k occur is 1. The first theorem is shown similarly; one can divide the random string into nonoverlapping blocks matching the size of the desired text, and make E k the event where the k th block equals the desired string.[b]
4. i invoke the 5th and wish to speak to a lawyer
5. im not racist
ok inflated gacha boy
holy shit man took a whole article
actually its a girl stop assuming genders
no fat gatcha boy
it has booba therefore girl
Even worse
inflated gacha girl
vaild point however manbooba
man cannot have as big of booba as girl
not when the size of nikacado
ok, then it has booba and long haRi
you used to be my homie
letsgooooo
what happened bro
This guy makes me wanna play Elden Rings
But no haircut can happen
then it’d look older since you need to not cut your hair for a long ass time
Your assuming age nowww