What is Digg?93 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+91The only number that matters is 42.
- akinder, on 10/12/2007, -22/+85∞ + US Deficit
Vinnar! - cornflakemd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+37Wow, by adding 1 to Graham's number I can make a larger number, thus it's "The World's Largest Number!" Not.
If you read the page that is show (which is actually from the 1980 book of world records) you'd note that is is the largest number used in a proof. - kaje, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21Take the worlds largest number, and add a hyphen before it.
- trogdor282, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Google Inc. unveiled its newest service today, Google Googol. Google Googol sends thousands of 0's directly to your desktop for an enhanced binary experience. Google Googol quickly grabbed 97% market share, sidelining competitors Yahoogol and Microsoft Googol Server 200000000000000000000000000000000000006.
- LoneStar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13what about the world's smallest number
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12That would be the world's lowest number. The least number is of course n^-1, where n = largest number. Or maybe it's just 0. I hate math.
- kaitos, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8i always assumed that since there is an infinite amount of numbers, then there should be an infinite amount of places(i apologize if i use the wrong word, I'm talking about tens, hundreds, thousands, etc) so there should be an infinite amount of names associated with those. in other words, you cannot think of any word (made up or not) that won't be the name of some number. at least that's my reasoning.
- Bonobo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Shfifty-five!!!!!!11"
WHAT YOU SAY!?!? - davidleeroth, on 10/12/2007, -4/+76 is afraid of 7 cuz 789
- MuZiKMafia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I still don't understand the answer "6"....after all the comments (both asinine and useful) I still don't understand why it is the "largest" number....
If this is worthy of a guiness record, even if it 20 years old, it must have some plausibility and solid logic... but i just dont see it.... - nodigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If you want the biggest numbers defined by mathematics (that are not infinite):
http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html - zero_bit, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6This story wins for largest percentage of useless comments! Hooray!
- zaxis, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7How about Aleph one
א : The smallest number bigger than infinity. - grahamcase, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I'm digging it, cause I referenced R.L. Graham in my honours thesis :D
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4It's a cool article, but it doesn't explain alot. Why are there only 63 steps? How is the answer 6? What's an upper bound number?
- cphuntington97, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Obligatory: http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html
Who can name the bigger number? - IHateScreenName, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4This is actually more interesting material about the same subject.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GrahamsNumber.html - yahoofrom, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"the anwer is : 6"
LOL - jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Maybe not, but one infinity can be bigger than another.
- tocksin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1shouldn't the title then be "the world's largest number ever used"
- tek1024, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No one yet has explained the meaning of the title; Graham's number is called "the world's largest number" because it actually IS the largest number ever to have been used in a mathematical proof.
- MacGyver2210, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Aleph is a hebrew character which is also used in mathematics as a designation of a degree of infinity. In this sense, aleph one wouldn't necessarily be any larger than infinity, but I don't even understand it all - so yeah, large numbers.... like biger than 9999999999999999 x 99999999999999999 + 99999999999999999 ^99999999999999999?
- spacebar14, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2∞*∞^∞
Can't beat that!
Infinity times infinity to the infinityist power. - CharlesGriswold, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Nope, it's 23. Fnord.
- RocketMike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Fnord?
You should know that 5 is FAR more important than 23. - jkaiser, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2If you add all the negative comment diggs in this post you will have the biggest negative number....seriously.
- Eddynz, on 03/20/2009, -0/+0How can 100% be larger than it? That would mean you have absolutely no numbers less than it... when obviously there are. GOSH
- Petarded, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1http://www.math.ucsd.edu.nyud.net:8090/~fan/ron/images/guiness.html
- tylerni7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2This is increidbly stupid... you can't have a largest number. Mathematically, no matter how large a number is, 100% are still larger than it. There are an infinite number of numbers, any number divided by infinity is 0. I don't think this should have made the front page...
- teece, on 10/12/2007, -3/+306metzp:
some infinities are indeed bigger than others. There are infinitely many integers. The power set of the integers (every possible subset of them, that is) is an infinity that mathematicians say is "obviously" "bigger" than the integer infinity. - trogdor282, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4oh sooomebody had to go and drag some real math into the discussion >:o
hehee but yes, infinity is not a number in the same sense as 5 or -12. more like a concept. - x3n1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Given an infinate quantity of, say apples, the said apples would occupy not only space but time itself. We know this to not be the case. Therefore, I propose a new largest number being: oo - 1 which allows for inifinate space-time relevative to ones offset in the universe.
- edzz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1∞ i still beat all of you
- MasherSCF, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Infinity isn't a number. Sorry. This article is taken out of context because it doesn't explain anything about Ramsey theory. The "worlds largest number" label is actually a bit of math humor. The worlds "smallest" number is what you get when you divide one by the worlds "largest" number, not the negative of the worlds largest number. The number's "size" is really its absolute value.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4googol.
- redDC143C, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7"The only number that matters is 42."
I'd disagree - I'm rather partial to 69 as well :D - jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -7/+5Why was this modded so down? Mad that sites like Digg and many others are just one big argument about who's e-pener is bigger?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1psheese, I didn't know numbers went up that high.... I just pooped in my pants.
- EdgarVerona, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Aye, indeed Aleph One is an open source game... but it is also an old mathematics term. If I remember correctly, it has something to do with the rate of approaching infinity... a concept kind of similar to when a kid says "Not it Infinity times!" and then some wise cracking kid says "Not it Infinity TIMES Infinity times!". I think.
- buckyboy314, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Actually, this number can be expressed in conventional notation.
let f(x)=x^(x^(x^(x)))
then the number is f^63(3) - buckyboy314, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0And, of courso, f^n(x) is NOT (f(x))^n, but rather f(f^(n-1)(x)), where f^1(x)=f(x)
- appleswitch, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Yes, Aleph One is an open source game. The open source version (sequel) to marathon _Infinity_. hence ∞+1
http://source.bungie.org - sneakerelph, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1∞! (factorial)
beat that - zivarik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0is it just me of all the links displayed in the front page have exceeded their bandwidth. this is just really stupid, and annoying. not even the 8080 thing is fixing these. what the hell?
- SeanAhern, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Okay, this number is pretty freakin' impressive. It's so large that you can't represent it with normal mathematical symbols and notations. In fact, they take 7 paragraphs to talk about the new notation that's required before then describing how one would describe the number.
The statistic that gets me is this: "If all the material in the universe were turned into pen and ink it would not be enough to write the number down [in traditional notation]." Yikes! - helfire, on 10/12/2007, -25/+23∞^∞ much bigger than all of yours :p
- maximumsteve1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2i like zaxis quote cuz it learned me
http://encyclopedia.tfd.com/Aleph+one - jimbo92107, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1I still think "umptee-zillions" is the biggest number, because even if you add one, you've still got umptee-zillions.
- ckirsch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0holy crap i found a bigger number! (6 !!)+1 !!!!
woo hoo, world record here i come! -
Show 51 - 92 of 92 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is