No it wouldn’t. You don’t understand how random works
A number chosen truly at random will have infinite digits
Submitted 11 months ago by HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
Comments
ShunkW@lemmy.world 11 months ago
funkajunk@lemm.ee 11 months ago
No, if truly random it could be any number from 0 to infinity. The randomization doesn’t impart any qualities to the selected number.
If you randomly selected numbers from the infinite range of numbers for an infinite number of time, you would get a result of “7” just as often as getting “3.456e11”.
al4s@feddit.de 11 months ago
The probability of getting a finite number is pretty much zero.
For any range [0; n], where n is finite, there are always infinitely many numbers larger than n, so the probability of getting a number in said range is n/(n+infinity). I feel very confident in saying that something with that probability will never happen.
funkajunk@lemm.ee 11 months ago
If there’s any probability of an event, on an infinite timeline, it occurs infinite times.
Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 11 months ago
The probability of getting any number with a given set of characteristics is pretty much 0, but that doesn’t mean the number doesn’t exist once generated.
pruwybn@discuss.tchncs.de 11 months ago
I see what you’re saying (assuming you mean a random integer from 0 to infinity), but it couldn’t really, since there’s no such thing as an integer with infinite digits - any random integer will have finite number of digits.
The real problem is there’s no way to choose a random number from 0 to infinity. Every finite number has a probability of 0, and in fact, for any number you choose, there is 0 probability that it will be less than that number. Note that 0 probability is different from “impossible” - see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almost_surely
panbroggi@feddit.it 11 months ago
I think it’s right
Crul@lemm.ee 11 months ago
I also think that’s correct… if
n ∈ ℝ.People are probably thinking about
n ∈ ℤ.HonoraryMancunian@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Yes real numbers, but as far as I’m aware it’ll happen for integers too almost surely
spez@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
why?
NAXLAB@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Oh my God it’s spez
johsny@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Is he here to fuck lemmy up too?
spez@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
👋 👋
KISSmyOS@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Fuck you!
Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Wait, are you high in the shower? Because that’s a little different.
Narrrz@kbin.social 11 months ago
are we counting an infinite number of zeroes after the decimal point, as having infinite digits? because if you specifically exclude while numbers, your output would not be truly random, though it would be essentially impossible to distinguish it from true randomness.
jabberati@social.anoxinon.de 11 months ago
@HonoraryMancunian No, since the result could be 3 randomly. It will only have infinite digits with a 100% probability. Yes, that's different.
FelipeFelop@discuss.online 11 months ago
Why would it have infinite digits? It is just as like to be 0.
Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 11 months ago
That’s not how that works.
Crul@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Doesn’t it depends on if we are talking about
n∈ℝorn∈ℤ?Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 11 months ago
No. In the set of real numbers it is still very possible to randomly select a number that can be written with finite digits.