News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Finding Waldo in π by mcpherrinm on Friday April 01, 2022 @01:58AM (#30875554)
Not exactly the same thing, but related: I think everyone believes Pi is a Normal Number, but it isn’t proven. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_number

I think if we could prove Pi is normal, we could probably also prove your statement to be true (but I’m not sure about that)

Re:Finding Waldo in π by slopbop on Friday April 01, 2022 @03:30AM (#30875980)
Normal is actually a stronger claim than "contains any finite string as a substring". That normal numbers contain any finite string as a substring is a straightforward consequence of the infinite monkey theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

To see that the converse does not always hold, you could take something like the Champernowne constant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champernowne_constant and pad it with 9s between each integer, ie

.192939495969798999109911991299...

so that you still contain every finite substring, but you have a >50% chance of a randomly selected digit being 9.

Re:Finding Waldo in π by erdos4d on Friday April 01, 2022 @08:36AM (#30877531)
I think there is a subtlety here that makes this fail. Normal does not imply that any finite substring exists, just that the probability of such a string existing is uniformly distributed within the space of possible values. There isn't any guarantee that you will actually see such a string, though you almost surely will.