Something to think about....

[rhuala]

Pretend for a minute that u have a very fast computer and unlimited time...

Now you construct a digital picture that is say 800 pixels wide by 600 pixels high. You select 1024 colors, a wide range of shades of red, blue, grey ...etc.

Using these 1024 colors you run a computer program that incrementally fills every pixels with every color. So lets say all pixels start out black (Color #1), then the very first pixel is filled from 0 to 1023 with all 1024 colors. Then the next pixel is filled with every color while the first is set to color #2, and so on and so on. Until eventually every combination of every color fills every pixel location...

Would you not then see every possible picture that could possibly exist? Every object in every position and every person, place or thing in every postion combined with everything else... even images of worlds we have not even seen yet...

Although this is a huge number, I believe (1024^(800x600)). Could this FINITE number not describe an INFINTE amount of pictures...

With your digital camera, you snap a digital picture. It's some size, 2560x1920x16,000,000 colors for a 5 mega pixel picture. The only difference is resolution, but this same pic has some descrete color at every pixel.

You could now scale that picture to the size above and limit it to the colors given 800x600x1024 colors. It wouldn't look as sharp or crisp but it would definitely be a good representation of the picture you just took. Now the above mentioned computer program while filling every pixel with every combination of color would at some point in time display the EXACT picture you just took. Or for that matter every picture ever taken or every picture about to be taken. I'm not making this up, if you think about this logically, this is a true statement...

The question being... how can a FINITE NUMBER define what should be an INFINTE amount of scenes or pictures??

rhuala

ps. I'm up late and was just pondering all the cool pics on this forum... nice forum by the way...

[Goat_Lord]

Cool concept, maybe someone could write a distributed computing program to render all those scenes..... though I think it would take millions of lifetimes to look at them all. Um, arent you supposed to post a picture in this forum?

[Nimrod]

Wrong Forum, and you're too late.

http://www.everythingsbeendone.com/

FINITE PIXEL ARRAY

[jca]

i dont really think there's an infinite # of pictures.. it'll be a huge number but it probably wont be infinite.

[Morlok]

Just because somone else is programming a version of a picture generator does not mean you cant! After I have a bit more programming under my belt and im out of college, I definately would love to take a shot at this Amazing Idea

[dfacto]

They say a million monkeys with a million typewriters could duplicate Shakespear's work in a million years.





But I don't believe it.
and I have no point in case you were wondering. And this is just a useless topic. I mean, you know the answer is that you would get every possible picture that you could generate with that given resolution. But it will take forever, or close enough to it.

[Morlok]

I dont see why exploring this would be pointless.

[dfacto]

If you know the answer why discuss it? The answer is yes, it can be done, theoretically speaking. That isn't what you want to discuss, there isn't anything to discuss. Perhaps the thread should have been about whether that would be real art. HAHA, that would make it the third thread recently taking on that subject matter!

[Devilock138]

Originally posted by dfacto
They say a million monkeys with a million typewriters could duplicate Shakespear's work in a million years.

Coincidentally a million monkeys would all die long before a million years would come.

[dfacto]

That being why they say it, and don't do it. Among other reasons. Like the fact that the monkeys wouldn't spend those years typing, but just throwing the typewriter around and hatching evil plans to take over the world.

[paper slayer]

This link might be of interest.
http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/56108.html

Look at that number. I'll call it "really big number"

To answer your question, you don't. You require an infinite of time to produce every possible picture that camera would be capable of taking.
That you said you had.
And I assume that infinity x "really big number" would actually equal infinity.

[Skank]

my head hurts...

:crosseyed :barfing:

[AnarchyAo2]

dfacto: Monkey's wouldn't throw typewriters, they'd throw their poop.

[Alex K.]

I think this has been already invented, and is called "the noise filter in Photoshop"

[winjer]

still wouldnt be a rembrandt

[Nimrod]

You couldn't predict murders. None of the pictures would be 'true' in a sense. Since there are infinite combinations, you would get every possible combination of people murdering each other (theoretically). Like, there would be a picture of me murdering every other single human that has ever, will ever, or even never existed, in every conceivable way from every conceivable angle at every conceivable point in space and time; and the same goes for everyone else, even those inexistant ones.

But the naked thing is pretty good... every person, ever (and never), naked, from every conceivable angle, every conceivable (and inconceivable) position, at every point in time and space... hmmm. the only problem would be somehow sorting them/ living long enough for a good one to come around ;) .

[Morlok]

I really hate how people are so quick to shoot something down because it "seems" impossible. Well it isnt, its just a large problem, like most anything else in mathematics. :bash:

[Alex K.]

It's not impossible, it's just that it doesn't have any practical applications and would require too much resources to complete. If I could code, had time and resources, I'd rather invest time into developing an AI (http://www.singinst.org/), donate money to charity (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&q=charity+organizations), or offer unused CPU for cancer research (http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/curecancer.html). I can come up with countless things that would be better to do than making a program that generates random noise 99.999999999999999% of the time.

[AnarchyAo2]

I don't like donating to charities. Giving my money away to some person to give to someone else seems wrong. Plus, would the people that i'm donating to help me if I was sick and they weren't? Most of them wouldn't. If I'm going to go give any money away, its going to be directly to the person. That way, I know its all going to them. Plus, you get the satisfaction of seeing how they react. I mean.. you know you like to see people's faces when you give them presents. Unless its something bad.

[dfacto]

"Merry Christmas impoverished boy!"
"What is it Anarchy?"
"ITS SARS! AHAHAHAHA"

:eek:

Look, as I said this is not impossible, it is just irrelevant. The processing power and time required to do it would not be worth the outcome. Namely lots and lost of noise and modern art.

Sure you could look at practically infinite number of boobies, but then again you would go impotent, not to mention DIE, before you could even sort through enough pics to come to anything that even looks like something.