[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 63 KB, 971x565, DWgReaDXcAAAvVQ.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10921789 No.10921789 [Reply] [Original]

What's the biggest number you can think of ?

>> No.10921792

>>10921789
Infinity hat

>> No.10921802

>>10921792
Johnathan W. Tooker?

>> No.10921811

>>10921789
thinking of 9 cubes arranged in a 2D 3x3 pattern is pretty much the most, after that it just breaks down to a pattern vs background

>> No.10921819

>>10921789
100

>> No.10921828
File: 96 KB, 867x685, 1561513472128.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10921828

googolplex^googolplex^googolplex....

>> No.10921838

>>10921828
84839293^84839299204^4939293939 is way bigger

>> No.10921839

Graham's number + 1

>> No.10921842

>>10921838
three dots implying infinity, never wrapped my head around how some infinities are bigger than others

>> No.10921864

>>10921842
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBp0bEczCNg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVZqPaH94qU

>> No.10921944

>>10921864
thank you, anon, for helping a brainlet out, also this is the first time i have seen this woman on numberphile.

>> No.10921949

Graham's number + 2

>> No.10921958

36 is the most individual things I can visualize before I lose track of some of them.

>> No.10921959

>>10921949
Just the amount of digits in TREE(3) is more than the value of Graham's number.

>> No.10921968

TREE(3) + 1

>> No.10921970

>>10921959
Just the amount of digits in 10^(TREE(3)+1) is more than the value of TREE(3).

>> No.10921976

>>10921959
Can someone point me to a easily digestible YouTube video that explains what TREE(x) is? Ideally numberphile or a smaller brain tier channel.

>> No.10921983

>>10921976
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P6DWAwwViU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IihcNa9YAPk

>> No.10921984

>>10921976
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a28725/number-tree3/

>> No.10922019

>>10921983
Thanks based anon

>> No.10922507

Does anyone know how big TREE(4) is? Could it be smaller than TREE(3)?

>> No.10922518

>>10921811
>>10921958
This seems like a far more interesting way if interpreting OP than just listing numbers in the Graham's and up neighborhood.
I can definitely visualize 4×4 grids, 5x5 is a bit hazy.i think if it's not a square it more difficult

>> No.10922532

Utter Oblivion

>> No.10922559

infinity^infinity^infinity^...

I win.

>> No.10922570

>>10921789
[math] \infty ! [/math]

>> No.10922577

Infinite is not a number

SSCG(3) >> TREE(3)
https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Subcubic_graph_number

>> No.10922588

[math]m\in \mathbb{R} | m > n \forall n\in \mathbb{R}[/math]

>> No.10922598

Let us define “OP’s Number” as the largest number in the thread + 1. OP’s Number is now the largest number in this thread.

>> No.10922615

>>10921789
at least 1.

>> No.10922619

>>10922598
An algorithm for adding a number is not a number. it is an algorithm.

>> No.10922621

>>10922588
ok, but defining a set via a property doesn't mean the set has elements. come on, basic logic.

>> No.10922629

>>10922621
That's the fucking point, there is no biggest number you autist

>> No.10922644

>>10922629
>What's the biggest number you can think of ?
>you can think of ?
>think
try doing it before posting.

>> No.10922664
File: 118 KB, 380x247, 1294369958977.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10922664

>>10921789
GRAHAM^graham

>> No.10922679

>>10921789
Like 5 or 6 maybe?
Yeah, definitely 6

>> No.10922807

1+i.
Try to find a number bigger than that. Pro tip: you can't, complex numbers aren't an ordered field.

>> No.10922844

>>10921789
6 gorillion

>> No.10922908

>>10921789
i usually get stuck around 2

>> No.10922926

-1/12

>> No.10923417

Absolute infinite

I win

>> No.10923561

>>10921819
damn that is big

>> No.10923641
File: 26 KB, 388x258, leran_spectral_sequence.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10923641

>>10921789
Two, because the Leray spectran sequence [math]E^{p,q}_2 \cong E_\infty^{p,q}[/math] for fibre bundles on paracompact spaces.

>> No.10923646

>>10921789
17

>> No.10923650

>>10921789
BB(TREE(3)) where BB(n) is the nth Busy Beaver number

>> No.10923661

>>10921789
the smallest number you can think of

>> No.10923675

Pi without the decimal point

>> No.10923681

Stop overthinking it retards. It's obviously Infinity to the infinity'th power

>> No.10923685

>>10922518
Based schizo

>> No.10923700

>>10921789 A Googol.

>> No.10923759

>>10922807
but it is a partially ordered field (using complex modulus) for which there always exists a larger element in the partial order. thus 2+2i is larger.

>> No.10923766

>>10921789
N'th DiCorrective Koolediscope Perspective Goon Squad Land Oozy Breakfast!
:D

Check out the climate thread

>> No.10923853

>>10921789
largest number you can think of plus one

>> No.10923882

>>10921789
1/0

>> No.10923949

>Biggest number you can think of
100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000847653782910147382957380545203506400000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000^87857987987896286529898659265895896739 + 150
I don't know how you could count that high

>> No.10923959

NaN

>> No.10924066

>>10921789
[math]\text{Ord}[/math]

>> No.10924157

>>10922570
>[math]sqrt(2pi)[/math]
That’s about as large as my penis

In feet of course

>> No.10925309

>>10923759
no, that's not antisymmetric. so no partial order

>> No.10925318

Every single number posted in this thread multiplied by each other to create a new number. Every single post, before and after, is included and this post cannot be included in anyone else's post.

There I win fuck you guys

>> No.10925340

99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

>> No.10925354

>>10925318
0

>> No.10925370

>>10921789
1/0

>> No.10925383

n + 1

>> No.10925393

bout tree fiddy

>> No.10925394

999

>> No.10925516

>>10925318
(Every single number posted in this thread multiplied by each other to create a new number)^grahams number. This number will not be included in the post I am replying to

I win more. Go fuck yourself

>> No.10925568

>>10921789
Add every number in this thread, plus one

>> No.10925583

I said you can THINK of. no the biggest number in general. Can't you read, fags? I mean a number you can literally imagine in your head as a countable number of things. How many distinct objects of different kinds can you imagine in your mind? 5? 10? Now, how about the same kind of objects, 10 apples? 20 apples? etc. I can probably 'feel' about 7 apples.

>> No.10925595
File: 23 KB, 292x325, +_86928725489ba967e8c7c1281ec77e14.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10925595

You know the planck?
Well get ready for the
ANTI-PLANCK

>> No.10925611

>>10925583
I was going to answer in that style but decided against it because I figured it would just be autist faggotry.

I have pretty solid visualization abilities and a ton of math in me, so, probably, somewhere between [math]10^{20}[/math] times the total upper information limit of the known universe and a googol.

>> No.10925637

>>10925318
>>10925354

>> No.10925640

>>10921819
teach me master

>> No.10925801

>>10925340
9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9^9

>> No.10926056

>>10922507
From the definitoon of TREE(.) I think it's at least as big as TREE(3), there should be at least as many posaibilities for trees with 4 nodes as there are for 3 nodes (intuition says there should be even more).
But it's just a random guess

>> No.10926924

Whatever the biggest number posted in this thread is plus one.

you guys literally can't make a number bigger than mine now. Try it.

>> No.10926927

>>10926924
whatever the biggest number posted in this thread is PLUS 2

>> No.10926939

>>10921789
infinity ^ infinity

>> No.10926944

>>10926927
that's not bigger than my number.

think about it for a second.

if your number is bigger than mine that means it's the biggest number in the thread and therefore my number is your number plus one.

>> No.10927096
File: 27 KB, 361x416, 1548686130665.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10927096

If you're using a number bigger than 8, you're not doing real math.

>> No.10927465

>>10921789
googolplex^googolplex^googolplex... and so on

>> No.10927470

>>10921828
fuck, beat me to it

>> No.10927477

Your mom weight.

>> No.10927520

>>10925516
0

get fucked

>> No.10927532

G =Graham's number

( G (Graham's number of knuth up arrows) G )!

>> No.10927541

>>10927477
+20 Your mom's weight + jewelry
+40 Your mom's weight + jewelry + makeup

>> No.10927797

>>10921789
2 infinity and beyond

>> No.10927800

Let CHAIN(f, a, n) be f(f(f(f(f(.....f(a)))...))) -- n recursive calls of f with initial value a

Let G(x) be Graham's function where G(64) is Graham's number.

Let M(n, 0) = 3
Let M(0, m), m>0 = CHAIN(G, 0, M(0,m-1))
Let M(n,m) n,m> 0 CHAIN(M(n-1), 0, M(n, m-1)))

M(10^10000, 10^1000000000)

>> No.10927809

>>10927800
that number + 1

>> No.10927823
File: 229 KB, 859x960, qFtnEPp2pvk37bnISQRXeHd1HOJ4E3c_voZzm3A7NMc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10927823

I don't think in numbers

>> No.10927879

>>10923417
Only logical answer

>> No.10929477

>>10927520
excellent

>> No.10929499

>>10927800
TREE(this number)

>> No.10929506

Alaph nolll to alaph noll

>> No.10929768

-2,147,483,648

>> No.10929797
File: 14 KB, 636x773, bc3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10929797

>>10929768

>> No.10931383

>>10921789
infinity^2
infinity^2^3^4....
infinity^infinity^infinity....
omega+1
omega+1+2+3......
omega^infinity
omega^infinity^2
omega^infinity^2^3^4.....
omega^infinity^infinity....
omega^omega+1
omega^omega+1+2+3+4....
omega^omega^infinty
omega^omega^omega......
X>omega^x>omega^x>omega^x>omega......
aleph_null^omega
aleph^aleph_null.....
true infinty
fractal infinty
0^0^0....

>> No.10931422
File: 87 KB, 582x600, 1470343635665.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10931422

>>10925354

>> No.10931433

>>10926944
your two posts would create a logical infinite loop actually

>> No.10931444

>>10931383
this is the lowest IQ post in this thread, I'd delete it if I were you

>> No.10931542

>>10927096
>doesn't think combinatorics is real math

>> No.10931572

>>10921789
infty

>> No.10931715

>>10931433
Ok watch this
Let this post be defined as the biggest number in the thread

>> No.10931731

>>10921789
6

>> No.10931750

>>10921789
1 is the biggest number because it's only number there is. Everything else is either a fraction or a collection of 1s.

Take two apples together and you won't end up with a big apple, so why putting two ones together make a bigger number?

>> No.10931752

>>10921789
TREE(50)

>> No.10931753
File: 21 KB, 360x360, 1557091282478.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10931753

>>10923959
>literally abbreviation of "Not a Number"
>biggest number

>> No.10931767

>>10921789
1 / (size of OP's penis)

>> No.10931839

>>10921789
a hundred million trillion times the amount of grain of sands in the universe, elevated to the power of one trillion million billion times the amount loser people like youo have wished they had a girl but they didnt, times the amount of stars in the universe, times the amounf of micromiliseconds elapsed since the big band elevated to one hundred trillion million billion trillion times the amount of atoms in the observavle universe, times ten trillion million elevated to the power of all possible chess moves

>> No.10931842

>>10931767
HAHAHA

>> No.10931845

>>10927823
based and high iq

>> No.10931882

DBL_MAX

>> No.10932255

>>10921949
That's gotta be at least like 3

>> No.10932259

>>10931752
How the mighty have fallen

>> No.10932268

>>10931750
Yeah but if we put together 2 of your brains, we would only have about one quarter of a cockroache's brain

>> No.10932275

>>10931715
+1

>> No.10932311

6 GORRILLION

>> No.10932315

>>10921789
the number of lives lost in the holocaust
oy vey

>> No.10932423

>>10932315
But that's like a billion numbers goyim!

>> No.10932577

>>10921789
As in able to visualize in the head with all the 00s following the 1? Or a matrix of function to generate uncountable numbers? The former is limited to a trillion or so. The later is virtually infinite due to sheer scale.

>> No.10932691

>>10921789
the mass of ur mom

>> No.10932771

12

>> No.10932878

>>10921789
Up to sets containing five objects which I can visualize in a straight line.
x x x x x

I can also think of sets that contain 6 objects by thinking of sets arranged in a two by three array.
x x x
x x x

Also sets containing eight objects.
x x x x
x x x x

....and sets containing 10 objects
x x x x x
x x x x x

I can't visualizing twelve that clearly.

But, I can visualize twenty-seven objects clearly by taking a three by three by three array of objects.


Any number other than those I've mentioned I can't think of, but I can resort to symbols to represent them.

So the largest number I can think off is twenty-seven.

>> No.10933592

>>10921789


>>10921789
The sum of all natural numbers.
That is, - 1/12

>> No.10933637

>>10921789
>I can't make threads on /sci/ so I will settle for replying to shitposts to hijack the thread
New thread topic: What mechanical description of motion should I optimize in order to optimize a strike? Possible answers include:
>kinetic energy
>momentum
>force
>impulse
>pressure
>optimize closeness to natural frequency
>something else?

>> No.10933870

OPs weight.

>> No.10934164

>>10921789
googolplex raised to the googolplex power googolplex times

>> No.10934171

>>10922577
>Infinite is not a number

infinity minus one then

>> No.10934181

>>10921842
It’s not really different from decimal numbers. There’s already sub infinities in the numbers we use all the time.

>> No.10934263

>>10921789
100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^100^1000000^69^420

>> No.10934356

Number = 0
While True:
Number += 1

>> No.10934527

>>10921789
the amount of cocks your mom has sucked.

>> No.10934663

>>10921789
N^U^M^B^E^R

>> No.10935392

>>10921789
your mom's weight

>> No.10935394

>>10921789
Define "think".

>> No.10935395

>>10935394
Define "define"

>> No.10935399

>>10921789
biggest number on this thread + 1

>> No.10935402

>>10935395
Define "Define "define""

>> No.10935408

[eqn]\frac{1}{\epsilon }[/eqn]

>> No.10935411

>>10935402
G*d did it. Fuckass

>> No.10935420

>>10934171
inf-1=inf

>> No.10935436

>>10921789
1 / ur iq

>> No.10935456

>>10921789
6 millions
t. jew

>> No.10935560

N^1gg3r

>> No.10935626

>>10921789
All of the suggestions in this thread combined + 1

>> No.10935807

>>10921789
All of the numbers, infinitely multiplied by themselves and infinity forever, at a rate of infinity multiplications each attosecond, for all of time.

>> No.10936824

1

>> No.10936828

>>10921789
1/3

>> No.10937578

69 dude