In referring to the possibility of chance forming our universe and us, Stephen Hawking in A Brief History of Time, writes: ”It is a bit like the well-known hordes of monkeys hammering away on typewriters — most of what they write will be garbage, but very occasionally by pure chance they will type out one of Shakespeare’s sonnets” Let us calculate how occasionally the ”very occasionally” will be that a sonnet of Shakespeare will appear.

In William Shakespeare : The Complete Works, all Shakespeare’s known sonnets are listed. All are quite similar in length. Sonnet number 18 in the last has the well-known opening line: ”Shall I compare you to a summer’s day?” The sonnet continues through the usual 14 lines, ending as:

So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.

There are 488 letters in the sonnet. Neglecting the spacing between the words, the chance of randomly typing the 488 letters to produce this one sonnet is one in 26^488. Using the more familiar 10-base decimal system, the chance is one in 10^690. The number 10^690 is a one followed by 690 zeros! The immense scale of this number is hinted at when one considers that since the Big Bang, 15 billion years ago, there have been only 10^18 seconds.

To write by random one of Shakespeare’s sonnets would take all the monkeys plus every other animal on Earth typing away on typewriters made from all the iron in the universe over a period of time that exceeds all the time since the Big Bang and the still the probability of a a sonnet appearing would be vanishingly small. At one random try per second, with even a simple sentence having only 16 letters, it would take 2 million billion years (the universe has existed for about 15 billion years) to exhaust all possible combinations.

Gerard L. Schroeder 

_____________________________

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins employs the typing monkey concept in his book The Blind Watchmaker to demonstrate the ability of natural selection to produce biological complexity out of random mutations.

Ja herre min skapare, om inte Dawkins existerade så skulle icke-darwinister behöva uppfinna honom.

Take the first time the Hebrew letter T appears in the Hebrew version of the book of Genesis. Count out 49 letters from that T and record the next letter, that is, record the 50th letter. Repeat this three times. The result: Torh.

Do it again in Exodus. The same result: Torh.

Do it again in Leviticus. The result: gibberish! However, take the first letter of the four-letter explicit name of God, the word Jehovah when transliterated into English using consonants for the Hebrew name of God and the vowels of the Hebrew word for Lord. Count 7 letters. Repeat this three times. The result: Jehovah (or JHVH in Hebrew).

Now to Numbers. The word Torh appears as the characteristic 49-letter spacing, but backwards. That is, it faces the Jehovah of Leviticus.

Repeat the process in Deutoronomy and get the same result: Torh facing Jehovah.

[...]

Why 49 spaces and then the next letter to spell the word Torah? In Leviticus 23:15, we are commanded to count 49 days from Passover and then to celebrate the holiday of Weeks on the next (50th) day. The holiday of Weeks commemorates the giving of the Torah on Mt. Sinai.

Why the 7 spaces to spell the name of God? The number 7 occupies a special place in the Torah. The Sabbath is the 7th day of the week, the 1st day made holy in the Bible. Traditionally, the Sabbath is a sign acknowledging that God created the universe.

They can change color, looking initially like tiny jewels, or golden ladybugs, but can alter the reflectivity of the cuticle so the outer layers become clear, revealing a ladybug type of red coloring with black spots. This color change is accomplished by microscopic valves controlling the moisture levels under the shell.

http://mad-as-a-marine-biologist.tumblr.com/post/15903924794/golden-tortoise-beetle

”Also, a simulated reality need not run in real time addressing computational constraints. The inhabitants of a simulated universe would have no way of knowing if one day of subjective time actually required much longer to calculate in their host computer, or vice-versa, or if the simulation is run in pieces on different computers, or with a million generations of monks working weekends on abacuses — all without the simulation missing a beat ‘in simulation time’.”

vet att vi pratat om detta på OK nångång förlängesedan..
total mindfuck att tänka att vi existerar i bollar-på-pinnar-i-en-rams rörelsemönster, från en annan level sett.

vad är det som saknas?

what is.

gammal artikel.
jhar försökt posta ett par ggr.

”Scientists are exploring the theory that people are drawn to certain trades and professions based on the connotations of their surnames.”

”The paper entitled Why Susie Sells Seashells by the Seashore: Implicit Egotism and Major Life Decisions cites the disproportionate number of dentists called Denise or Dennis as an example of the trend.”

nån – förklara!

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2012/01/why-twilight-sucks.html