40 ms·

5.73x10^1000000000 There you are then. Not that impressive, is it?

by debacle 12y ago

VLM 12y ago
3 ↑↑ 4 Where ↑ is the knuth uparrow notation, beats your example in only 4 symbols with about three thousand times as many digits
- ackalker 12y ago
  I'll see you and raise you a © . Which in my book is c, the speed of light in a vacuum, 299792458 m/s, a mere 9 digits, but inscribed in a circle using Steinhaus–Moser notation[1] is equivalent to a number so mindbogglingly big that I'm not even going to attempt to calculate its measure.[2] [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinhaus%E2%80%93Moser_notation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinhaus%E2%80%93Moser_notatio... [2]: Not that it makes any sense to perform this operation on c, but I think that use of © in this way is much more interesting than its current usage.
  - VLM 12y ago
    I admit defeat, using standard notation I can't think of a better ratio of numeric length vs symbolic representation. Well played! Aaronson's got a blog entry tangentially related to this competition http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html "In an old joke, two noblemen vie to name the bigger number. The first, after ruminating for hours, triumphantly announces "Eighty-three!" The second, mightily impressed, replies "You win.""
    - ackalker 12y ago
      Thank you for a nice challenge, and thanks for the interesting link :-) As someone who is genuinely interested in AI, I'm very curious if lateral thinking like we demonstrated can ever be matched by a machine. I'm watching things unfold with great interest.
- baddox 12y ago
  You felt the need to say "Where ↑ is the knuth uparrow notation," so I would argue that those symbols (as well as all the symbols in an article describing Knuth up arrow notation) should also be counted.
  - VLM 12y ago
    "You felt the need to say "Where ↑ is the knuth uparrow notation,"" Mere pessimism on my part about UTF-8 handling. Its standard notation. After all, its Knuth, therefore its standard.
- Igglyboo 12y ago
  ௸ Where ௸ is my own large number notation, beats your example in only 1 symbol with about 3 ↑↑ 4 times as many digits.

5.73x10^1000000000 There you are then. Not that impressive, is it?

by debacle 12y ago

5.73x10^1000000000 There you are then. Not that impressive, is it?

VLM 12y ago

3 ↑↑ 4 Where ↑ is the knuth uparrow notation, beats your example in only 4 symbols with about three thousand times as many digits

ackalker 12y ago
I'll see you and raise you a © . Which in my book is c, the speed of light in a vacuum, 299792458 m/s, a mere 9 digits, but inscribed in a circle using Steinhaus–Moser notation[1] is equivalent to a number so mindbogglingly big that I'm not even going to attempt to calculate its measure.[2] [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinhaus%E2%80%93Moser_notation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinhaus%E2%80%93Moser_notatio... [2]: Not that it makes any sense to perform this operation on c, but I think that use of © in this way is much more interesting than its current usage.
- VLM 12y ago
  I admit defeat, using standard notation I can't think of a better ratio of numeric length vs symbolic representation. Well played! Aaronson's got a blog entry tangentially related to this competition http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html "In an old joke, two noblemen vie to name the bigger number. The first, after ruminating for hours, triumphantly announces "Eighty-three!" The second, mightily impressed, replies "You win.""
  - ackalker 12y ago
    Thank you for a nice challenge, and thanks for the interesting link :-) As someone who is genuinely interested in AI, I'm very curious if lateral thinking like we demonstrated can ever be matched by a machine. I'm watching things unfold with great interest.
baddox 12y ago
You felt the need to say "Where ↑ is the knuth uparrow notation," so I would argue that those symbols (as well as all the symbols in an article describing Knuth up arrow notation) should also be counted.
- VLM 12y ago
  "You felt the need to say "Where ↑ is the knuth uparrow notation,"" Mere pessimism on my part about UTF-8 handling. Its standard notation. After all, its Knuth, therefore its standard.
Igglyboo 12y ago
௸ Where ௸ is my own large number notation, beats your example in only 1 symbol with about 3 ↑↑ 4 times as many digits.