Graduate How Vast Is Graham's Number Compared to Our Universe?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thetexan
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the incomprehensible scale of Graham's number, specifically G64, and its comparison to the observable universe. Participants emphasize the inadequacy of traditional logarithmic scales and the immense power of Knuth's up-arrow notation. A googolplex is clarified as a 1 followed by a googol of zeroes, highlighting the vast difference between a googol and G1. The conversation concludes with a recommendation to understand exponential towers and tetration to grasp the magnitude of these numbers.

PREREQUISITES
  • Knuth's up-arrow notation
  • Understanding of exponential towers
  • Concept of tetration
  • Basic knowledge of large numbers (googol, googolplex)
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Knuth's up-arrow notation in detail
  • Study exponential towers and their implications
  • Learn about tetration and its applications
  • Explore the concept of large numbers, focusing on googol and googolplex
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and anyone interested in the concepts of large numbers and their implications in theoretical mathematics.

thetexan
Messages
269
Reaction score
13
Wow. I started out thinking I might be able to estimate the size if Graham's number but I have reached my limit of effort.

After repeated work I believe I have gone part way.

Realize that the number is G64. I won't try to explain. Suffice it to say that Knuth's notation makes the logarithmic scale seem inconceivably inadequate to use as a reference.

Anyway. I read that if you fill the observable universe with grains of sand and on each of those grains use a microscope to write ten billion zeroes you would have the representation of a google. A Googol is incomprehensibly infinitesimal compared to G1 much less G64.

By my crude estimation you would need a sphere so large in scale to the observable universe as to be equal in ratio as a proton is to the observable universe filled with grains of sand each with 10 billion zeroes written on them to approximate a number roughly 3!4 shy of G1. (Up arrows). Also roughly equal to the US debt in 2030 by the way!

My head hurts to even try to finish G1. G64 is impossible.

tex
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Im sorry I meant ...3!3 shy of G4...
 
I screwed up again. Sorry. I meant 3!3 shy of G1 not G4.
 
A few things...

Please keep in mind that you can edit your posts, as opposed to replying over and over.

thetexan said:
Anyway. I read that if you fill the observable universe with grains of sand and on each of those grains use a microscope to write ten billion zeroes you would have the representation of a google. A Googol is incomprehensibly infinitesimal compared to G1 much less G64.
You mean a googolplex. A googol is a 1 followed by 100 zeroes. A googolplex is a 1 followed by a googol zeroes.

thetexan said:
By my crude estimation you would need a sphere so large in scale to the observable universe as to be equal in ratio as a proton is to the observable universe filled with grains of sand each with 10 billion zeroes written on them to approximate a number roughly 3!4 shy of G1.
No, your estimate is way off. You need to understand that up arrow notation is a lot more powerful than you think, and for many of those that first delve into the topic, they almost always vastly misunderstand and underestimate the sheer magnitude of up arrows. For starters, don't bother trying to represent their scale with "a grain of sand expanded to the universe, with all its grains of sand expanded into another universe, etc. etc. with every grain of sand having trillions of 0's on it". This operation of grains representing universes and grains in that universe representing another universe is simply multiplication. You need to up your game beyond exponentiation!

thetexan said:
My head hurts to even try to finish G1. G64 is impossible.
Yes, yes it is.

You need a firm grasp of exponential towers and their power, so just google tetration to begin with, and once you feel as though you understand that, then you're ready to move on further.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
875
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
18K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
28
Views
6K