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 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#165804 - 02/07/07 10:38 PM Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
olly Offline
old hand
olly  Offline
old hand

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
Auckland, New Zealand
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 Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
TEd Remington Offline
Carpal Tunnel
TEd Remington  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,467
Marion NC
Isn't it googolplex?


TEd
#165806 - 02/08/07 03:34 AM Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Faldage Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Faldage  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 Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
tsuwm Offline
Carpal Tunnel
tsuwm  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
this too shall pass
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 Re: intentional provocation  
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
AnnaStrophic Offline
Carpal Tunnel
AnnaStrophic  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
lower upstate New York
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 Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,523
TheFallibleFiend Offline
veteran
TheFallibleFiend  Offline
veteran

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,523
Virginia, USA
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 Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Buffalo Shrdlu Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Buffalo Shrdlu  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Vermont
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 Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
dalehileman Offline
Pooh-Bah
dalehileman  Offline
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,773
Apple Valley, CA, USA
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 Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,523
TheFallibleFiend Offline
veteran
TheFallibleFiend  Offline
veteran

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,523
Virginia, USA
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 Re: Large numbers revisited  
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
olly Offline
old hand
olly  Offline
old hand

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 956
Auckland, New Zealand
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!

Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Jackie 

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,878
Posts223,777
Members9,009
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Akintola, VegasCaptain, Mallo, drad_dog, Kimi
9009 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 52 guests, and 3 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters(All Time)
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,538
LukeJavan8 8,940
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

© 1994-2017 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.014s Queries: 13 (0.003s) Memory: 2.7336 MB (Peak: 2.8666 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2017-07-24 16:56:11 UTC