Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#165794 02/07/07 03:04 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
While we've discussed this before, in an attempt to explain to a group of Christians a connection between the terms "omnipotent" and "forever" I am trying to express how many serial universes She might already have created

I seek the most economical way to write an unimaginably large number. For example, how would one write the sum of one centillion (ten to the 303'd) factorial, factorialed that many times over again, etc

Thanks to anyone with a bent for mathematical curiosities


dalehileman
#165795 02/07/07 04:17 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
I'm not sure I understand the problem correctly.

((10^303)!) ^ ((10^303)!)

If you write it by hand or with MathType(c), for example, you can get away without the carets and the parens.

#165796 02/07/07 04:28 PM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
yes we have discussed this before; as a general rule we are polite here, and as in most polite society, we don't discuss religion or politics.

but then you are old and senile (or perhaps old and stupid, or old and rude) and you keep forgetting that. but somehow you are not so old or senile that you forget to bring up topics 'brought up here before' -again and again.

hmm. maybe you're just a troll.

#165797 02/07/07 05:36 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 557
M
addict
Offline
addict
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 557
Most of my dieties prefer to create parallel universes rather than serial ones... takes at least Aleph-null fewer eternities.

#165798 02/07/07 07:27 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526

"the sum of one centillion (ten to the 303'd) factorial, factorialed that many times over again, etc"

My last answer is wrong. That 'sum' thing is throwing me off. Regardless my last answer is wrong.

#165799 02/07/07 07:31 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Helen: Thank you for sharing that with your friends, however many that might be


dalehileman
#165800 02/07/07 09:51 PM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Quote:

Most of my dieties prefer to create parallel universes rather than serial ones... takes at least Aleph-null fewer eternities.




Were they calorie counting?


TEd
#165801 02/07/07 10:03 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
hopefully low-sugar serial.


formerly known as etaoin...
#165802 02/07/07 10:05 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Fal yes thank you, that was the sort of expr I was looking for. Now can anyone suggest a much bigger number but using even fewer characters


dalehileman
#165803 02/07/07 10:32 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just use "googleplex"?

#165804 02/07/07 10:38 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
Quote:

wouldn't it be a lot simpler to just use "googleplex"?




Is that where all the Googlites hang out.

Last edited by olly; 02/07/07 10:39 PM.
#165805 02/08/07 12:57 AM
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Isn't it googolplex?


TEd
#165806 02/08/07 03:34 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
I was going to say Skewes' Number but that turns out to be a lot smaller than originally thought so how about Graham's number?

#165807 02/08/07 04:02 AM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Quote:

Isn't it googolplex?




The Googleplex is the Google company headquarters, located at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway in Mountain View, Santa Clara County, California, near San Jose.

The name Googleplex is a play on words, being a combination of the words Google and complex, and a reference to googolplex, the name given to the large number 10^{10^{100}}.
- Wikipedia

-joe (or perhaps it was just a mistake) friday

#165808 02/08/07 01:02 PM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Quote:



I seek the most economical way to write an unimaginably large number. For example, how would one write the sum of one centillion (ten to the 303'd) factorial, factorialed that many times over again, etc

Thanks to anyone with a bent for mathematical curiosities




Your OP would have been just as intelligible, and less provocative, without the first paragraph, the example I've cited above. You do this stuff on purpose, don't you, Dale? No wonder you've been kindly invited not to post at some of the other forums you used to pester.

And here I posted a new (to me) neologism URL (WordSpy) to try to give you something to do, but... it seems you have more fun cultivating animosity than discussing words and language [I-give-up]

#165809 02/08/07 01:54 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
All very new stuff to me. Thanks, Faldage.
The wiki explanation is a little unclear.
I'm not sure, but I think Dale's number is bigger than Grahams number,
assuming Grahams Number is specifically G(64).

However, we make a number bigger than Dale's number, I think; namely, G(G(10^303!)!)!, for example. It's kinda hard to tell at this point.


Last edited by TheFallibleFiend; 02/08/07 01:57 PM.
#165810 02/08/07 03:25 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
might be some cool stuff here: numbers

cool.

there's also here: PlanetMath

Last edited by etaoin; 02/08/07 03:29 PM.

formerly known as etaoin...
#165811 02/08/07 03:39 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Fal, thank you, that's a good one. To save me the trouble of looking it up, however, does G stand for Googol or Googolplex, and if the former, what's the symbol for the latter

eta: THank you for those links, I have ensconced them anongst my Faves

Anna: Animosity may be in the eye of the beholder, while I can't see anything provocative about the first paragraph. However, I apologize if it somehow offended you


dalehileman
#165812 02/08/07 07:05 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
The 'G' stands for numbers in Graham's sequence that is explained on the page that Faldage gave us the link to.

G(1) = 1
G(2) = 2^2
G(3) = 3^3^3
G(4) = 4^4^4^4
G(5) = 5^5^5^5^5

Pretty big numbers. I like this stuff, but I'm having trouble figuring out what's bigger than what. Normally when I'm faced with big numbers at work, I see how the log works or the log log ... but this stuff is very huge.

My first job out of college, another program had to compute average network capacity as a percentage of total capacity. The final results should be between 0 and 1, but the intermediate results were overflowing the processor - and other alternatives were too time consuming: so I showed him how to use logarithms to make the huge numbers smaller. Worked like a champ. But while those numbers were vastly bigger than any most people are likely to use, they are much closer to zero than to the numbers that you and Faldage are referring to.

#165813 02/08/07 09:12 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
Quote:

a reference to googolplex, the name given to the large number 10^{10^{100}}.




A googolplex is 10^googol and a googolplexplex is 10^googolplex. Could we call it a Duplex? Or a twoplex? Perhaps a complex or a perplex!

#165814 02/08/07 10:39 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Guys, thank you. It always pleases not to have to look it up. Hwever, I wonder whether there's a symbol for the googolplex, plexplex, etc


dalehileman
#165815 02/08/07 11:47 PM
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
T
veteran
Offline
veteran
T
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,529
Zounds!

Forsooth- the latter day Middle Agers here ponder how many Angels can dance
on the head of a pin -- the answer is nowt -- meanwhile the Huns are at the door.

May God save the Queen from the Comet and may these idolaters and idlers ponder away in Purgatory for a gobble-de-gook-duplex number of years plus one day.

Then, and only then, should they be allowed to enter the gates of Hell.
Or Heaven, if perchance they can prove good behavior or worthwhile thought.


Last edited by themilum; 02/08/07 11:57 PM.
#165816 02/09/07 08:40 AM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
"Numberless are the World's Wonders", make up the music to this yourself. Give it a just a little swinging chance.

#165817 02/09/07 04:10 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 557
M
addict
Offline
addict
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 557
I already mentioned in this thread the transfinite number aleph-null which if I could use a Hebrew font for aleph and a subscript 0 for null would be only 2 characters. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_null

#165818 02/09/07 04:38 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Myr, thank you for that link, but I'm not much as a mathematician, and anyway infinities don't count, sorry, should have mentioned that. Meantime I'm still looking for the largest finite number than can be expressed in the smallest number of characters

And yes I realize that would entail a few loose ends, but thanks again


dalehileman
#165819 02/12/07 05:19 PM
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
Quote:

Meantime I'm still looking for the largest finite number than can be expressed in the smallest number of characters



How about "lots" or "scads"?

#165820 02/12/07 05:22 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
a bunch.


formerly known as etaoin...
#165821 02/12/07 05:49 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
but, see, dale's looking for a type-3 expression, and ideally it will be a neologism!!

#165822 02/12/07 06:48 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Quote:

but, see, dale's looking for a type-3 expression




I didn't think anyone understood what that meant...


formerly known as etaoin...
#165823 02/13/07 02:36 PM
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
A
Pooh-Bah
Offline
Pooh-Bah
A
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
I think you'll have to specify the number of characters you want to limit it to Dale. One can write a much larger number with five characters than with two.

If we limit ourselves to two characters (including arabic numerals and operands like +, -, x, ÷, and !, but exempting ^ for exponentiation since it can be accomplished with superscript), then I think the largest number you can write is 9^9, which is equal to 387420489.

If you allow three characters, I think the largest is (9^9)!, which is equal to 387420489! For the non-math folks out there, that's 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 .... x 387420489.

#165824 02/13/07 06:02 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Alex: I have this instinctive feeling that there should be a way to express an unimaginatively large finite number in a minimal space. It's been suggested that G(G(10^303!)!)!, is a pretty good one. However, G(G(10^999!)!)!, is obviously bigger and so I suppose one might start by attempting to express this number in even fewer characters. However, if an unimaginatively larger number could be expressed in just a few more characters that would be all right too

It's like defining Type-2 and -3 words. Hard to express though a few liberal thinkers--eta and zm for instance--seem to catch on. As the Zen master might say, allow your intuition freedom to roam without being excessively judgmental


dalehileman
#165825 02/13/07 07:54 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
big-ass
etc.
almostifinity


formerly known as etaoin...
#165826 02/13/07 08:25 PM
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
A
Pooh-Bah
Offline
Pooh-Bah
A
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
Quote:

As the Zen master might say, allow your intuition freedom to roam without being excessively judgmental




Anyway, for your purpose of expressing a vast but finite number to a non-scientific audience I would actually not use the factorial ! or any other operands and stick to simply writing the number using strictly numerals. For any given number of numerals used, a power tower or tetration as it is called will be the highest number.

9^9 is greater than 99
9^(9^9) is greater than 999 and is in fact an incredibly large number. If you were to actually evaluate that number, it would have 369,693,100 digits! Read more about it here. Excerpt follows:

9^9^9

Date: 09/10/97 at 18:53:43
From: Sean H
Subject: 9 ^ 9 ^ 9

Dr. Math,

In my Algebra II class, my teacher asked us what the largest number we
can write is, only with a limit of 3 digits. I answered 9 ^ 9 ^ 9
(nine to the ninth to the ninth) and was correct.

Getting home, and on my computer however, I set out to find the answer
to that question. 9 ^ 9 was easy: 387420489. But now, how in the
world to do 9 ^ 387420489?

I tried writing a C++ program to do it, only the largest data type you
can use, an unsigned long, only supports up to 10 digits. That wasn't
getting me anywhere. On the Internet, I saw one person say that the
answer would have 300,000,000 digits! Is this true?

So my question: Is it really that large an answer? And is there a way
I could find the answer? If it really is that big, how long would it
take to answer on a large mainframe? (I'm talking Cray here). Would it
be hours, days, months, or years?

Thanks a lot,
Sean


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: 09/25/97 at 15:47:28
From: Doctor Ken
Subject: Re: 9 ^ 9 ^ 9

Hi!

To find out how many digits some number has, the best way is to take
the log base 10 of that number and round down to the nearest integer,
and add 1.

For instance, 42 has 2 digits, and the log base 10 of 42 is about
1.62325: round that down and you get 1, add 1 and you get 2. 34578 has
5 digits, and its log base 10 is 4.5388: round it down and you get 4,
add 1 to get 5. 1000 has 4 digits and its log base 10 is 3. Round down
to get 3, add 1 to get 4.

So we want to find the log base 10 of your number, 9^387420489. Let's
do it:

Log (9^387420489) = 387420489 * Log(9) (Pull out the power)
= 387420489 * 0.954243 (do the log)
= 3.6969309963 x 10^8 (by calculator)
= 369693099.63

So your number has 369,693,100 digits. That's a big number!

#165827 02/15/07 03:12 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
What's the macro for the upside down v--thanks guys


dalehileman
#165828 02/15/07 03:35 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Fal: Thank you exceedingly for your participation, but I am confused about Graham's Number. I have heard it expressed as G(63) or as just plain G, but I don't understand how it can still be Guiness' winner if G(65) is bigger and could just as easily be used in a new problem

http://thesaurus.maths.org/mmkb/entry.html?action=entryById&id=2525

Not good at math


dalehileman
#165829 02/15/07 04:52 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Quote:

What's the macro for the upside down v--thanks guys




d'oh.
SHIFT-6: ^

#165830 02/15/07 05:05 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
What's the macro for the upside down v?

What's a macro macro macro, dada? The word, macro, as are all other words, is synonymous with drive. Dada!


Ceci n'est pas un seing.
#165831 02/15/07 05:54 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526

Dale, no matter what specific number one is given, she could easily construct a bigger number by adding 1, or a much bigger number by taking the factorial or the graham's function of that number.

The interesting thing about Graham's number is that it's the biggest number that was actually used non-parenthetically. http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/cyc/g/graham.htm

#165832 02/15/07 06:07 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Fal, thank you for that link, and you have to forgive my abysmal mathematical ignorance, but I don't understand it. Is Graham's number G or G(63); and if the latter, how is 63 the upper limit? And does it somehow depend upon the number 3? And why would Guiness cite it if it isn't, inasmuch as upon acceptance all the math whizzes in the world would immediately set about devising a problem using a bigger number


tsu: Thank you for ^. That in using a keyboard some 72 years I had never found occasion for it, is testimony to my mathematical vincibility. For my benefit (and others of my ilk) you might explain its use and limitations; that is, where parens are called for, when not, etc

zm: Not yet anyhow

Myr: Trouble with parallel universes is that each one would have to be serial also. at risk of offending some present, this seems unmanageable even if She is omnipotent


dalehileman
#165833 02/15/07 06:24 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Thank you for ^. That in using a keyboard some 72 years I had never found occasion for it, is testimony to my mathematical vincibility. For my benefit (and others of my ilk) you might explain its use and limitations; that is, where parens are called for, when not, etc

not me, bro. I don' be no steenken mathematician for about 6^2 years now.

#165834 02/15/07 08:04 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
d'uh, please endure the confusion of an ancient curmudgeon evidently stepping to the brink of senility, I just glanced at my typewriter. Given the inability of his minions to adequately deal with the superscript, to make room for the ^ I see that Bill has moved the underline from above the 6 to just-to-the-right of the zero


dalehileman
#165835 02/15/07 08:11 PM
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
Dale, it's not the upper limit of all numbers, it's the upper limit on the answer to a specific mathematical question. I think G's number is G(63), but G's notation can be used on any integer. Surely G(99) > G(63), but G(63) is useful because it says that the answer to a specific question cannot be greater than that.

This kind of this is very useful in general in computer science and operations research, for example, although I've never had occasion to use any numbers quite this big. I just have a very vague awareness that there are people looking at much bigger problem spaces.

#165836 02/15/07 08:13 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Mine's vaguer


dalehileman
#165837 02/15/07 11:36 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Quote:

... G(63) is useful because it says that the answer to a specific question cannot be greater than that.




So what's the question for which G(42) is the answer?

#165838 02/16/07 12:50 AM
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
Quote:

Quote:

... G(63) is useful because it says that the answer to a specific question cannot be greater than that.




So what's the question for which G(42) is the answer?



(G)Life, (G)the Universe, and (G)Everything.
"Gee", he said with exasperation.

#165839 02/16/07 12:51 AM
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
Is this what is known as "The G spot?"


"I am certain there is too much certainty in the world" -Michael Crichton
#165840 02/16/07 01:18 AM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin = G(googolplex) ^ G(aleph sub null)


Ceci n'est pas un seing.
#165841 02/16/07 03:38 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
What about the angels that don't dance?
how do we count them?

#165842 02/16/07 03:31 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Careful there Helen, you're skirting a religious issue


dalehileman
#165843 02/16/07 11:14 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Quote:

What about the angels that don't dance?
how do we count them?




If I can't dance, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

#165844 02/19/07 07:15 PM
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 293
Quote:

Careful there Helen, you're skirting a religious issue



Do all angels wear skirts?

#165845 02/19/07 07:32 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Around here, they'd better, lest lest they be accused, along with my fellow de-'s, of having assumed the posture of symbolic capitulation recently sanctioned by the otherwise conservative State of Massachusetts, a depiction of which is however considered unacceptable in even such a bastion of liberalism as WordSmith


dalehileman
#165846 02/19/07 08:17 PM
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,290
the posture of symbolic capitulation

quid autem uides festucam in oculo fratris tui et trabem in oculo tuo non uides.


Ceci n'est pas un seing.
#165847 02/20/07 03:59 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Quote:

quid autem uides festucam in oculo fratris tui et trabem in oculo tuo non uides




During the late-summer tobacco-chewing festival, in a fit of temper your four-eyed collegiate chums throw off their spectacles, grinding them into the ground without the slightest compunction


dalehileman
#165848 02/20/07 06:23 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
...to say nothing of Vermont and Connecticut


dalehileman
#165849 02/20/07 06:55 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
> Vermont

what did I do?


formerly known as etaoin...
#165850 02/20/07 09:20 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
D
Pooh-Bah
OP Offline
Pooh-Bah
D
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
I don't know, but I'll bet it was very tempered, reasonable and scholarly


dalehileman
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Jackie 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,326
Members9,182
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Ineffable, ddrinnan, TRIALNERRA, befuddledmind, KILL_YOUR_SUV
9,182 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 739 guests, and 1 robot.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,542
wofahulicodoc 10,539
LukeJavan8 9,916
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2024 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5