digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

A fascinating test of Google Page Rank

google.com — I like to play around with Google's search features, and one of the things I tried doing was entering a search query which would yeild all 8,168,684,336 pages. I came close; 7,180,000,000. What's interesting (though not surprising) is how effective pagerank is in this situation. Check it out, and compare the results with Alexa

Who dugg this? Made popular Sep 27, 2005

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

53 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • slipknot3chris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1if you do (allinurl: www OR com) you get 8,380,000,000 pages
  • celeb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Personalized Results 1 - 100 of about 9,740,000,000 for allinurl: www OR com. (0.34 seconds)
  • ArtVandelay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well I'll be damned. Thanks skchris. It's still fascinating to browse the results.
  • teevee247, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0-z RETURNS Results 1 - 100 of about 10,690,000,000 for -z [definition]. (0.28 seconds)

  • dumbtech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I win: http://www.google.com/search?q=-0

    "Results 1 - 10 of about 9,950,000,000 for -0. (0.03 seconds)"
  • 662662, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is really cool...It is starnge that there are no adverts on the page though
  • CorpT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0but a search of -0 returns completely different results. www seems to be the best search.
  • ArtVandelay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's even more interesting now that they've taken the index count off of their homepage.
  • thereisnospoon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Results 1 - 100 of about 11,090,000,000 for -sex [definition]. (0.54 seconds)
  • ArtVandelay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Also a minor curiosity: no adds for allinurl: www, but you get adds for allinurl: www OR com ?
  • rhyno2000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Results 1 - 100 of about 11,250,000,000 for -0000. (0.13 seconds)

    (bows) Thank you very much.
    Where do I pick up my check?
  • ArtVandelay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah, I'm not sure why I did it either. Like I said - just playing around and this digg was reactionary. It's still strange that there's no advertising, isn't it?
  • daze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Results 1 - 10 of about 10,750,000,000 for -11111. (0.32 seconds)
  • daze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Results 1 - 10 of about 10,720,000,000 for -aaa [definition]. (0.32 seconds)
  • rookieone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0haha Results 1 - 10 of about 11,060,000,000 for -boobs [definition]. (0.23 seconds) - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=-boobs
  • alabare, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Now try a search that returns only 1 result, using only one word in your search.
  • fuutott, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0anybody knows why query "* *" returns only 10.600.000.000 ? using google.com in uk.
  • Mininday, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hehehe
  • Mininday, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Losers

    "allinurl: http:" Results in 15,000,000
  • rhyno2000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Mininday, 15 million? Meh.
  • JargonScott, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A one word search with a 1-1 result:

    poopstacker

    That's my 3 year old's favorite silly word.
  • Elxx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Bahahah, you guys are crazy...this is a contest now?
  • interiot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"* *" Results in 11,260,000,000 (0.28 seconds)
  • gnugy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Another one word search:

    dodobum

    That's my favorite silly word as a 22 yr old :).
  • Quell23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hmmmm did a search for "-**" no quotes and recieved this.

    Server Error
    The server encountered an error and could not complete your request.

    If the problem persists, please mail error@google.com and mention this error message and the query that caused it.
  • eszter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm not sure why you'd use allinurl since that's a restrictive measure (it requires that something be in the URL).

    A search for www yields "about 9,160,000,000". That "about x" figure is often not very reliable, or certainly not possible to verify it given that Google doesn't show you more than 1000 results to any query.
  • Mongoose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Alexa = pwnt.
  • interiot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0To get the 11.26 billion, use "* *" WITH quotes. Mine still wins (0.01 billion more than -0000). Though neither are in an accurate order, as far as I can tell.
  • gklitt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Results 1 - 10 of about 8,650,000,000 for a. (0.13 seconds)
  • PlancksCnst, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Got just one: "googlheimer".
  • haileyz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is awesome. I love google.
  • juicewvu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Some of you guys have way too much time on your hands.
  • D4r7h3v1l, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i can top all of yours.
    http://www.google.com/search?hs=PP2&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2coff=1&client=firefox&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&as_qdr=all&q=+-**&btnG=Search
  • pussyWagon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0www or com is NOT in all web URL's so you would not get all pages returned.
    But if I am not mistaken, Google will not retuen all of the results in any search but a subset of them.
  • PoVRAZOR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Because "AddWords" are paid and attached to common searches, not ridiculous "trying to catch 'em all" searches.
  • ArtVandelay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0this one's kinda funky:

    http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hs=Tuh&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=%2B*&btnG=Search

    Did we ever figure out why we don't get any ads for the "www" results?
  • ArtVandelay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0interiot is the leader. what are we missing here? we're about 50,000,000,000 pages short
  • Antibubbles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0inurl:*.* 9,580,000,000
  • compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Your search - hdhfsajhdsajflkhlksdhfhjfklsjksdfaf - did not match any documents.

    I win.
  • f1gm3nt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0dorkaism - when a dork or nerd has an orgaism by the means of doing something dorky i.e. 'I had a dorkaism after watch Advent Children!' dorkasim doesn't return anything just a 'did you mean dorkism?'
  • 662662, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0when you do a serach for -1337 instead of -leet the same results show up... interesting....
  • rookieone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hahaha..its a story gon' outa control people!!!
  • mojaam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Hmm, interesting...
  • DannyPage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+09,590,000,000 = -"Google did your mom last night".

    who would have that on their webpage??
  • carstereos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I tried Yahoo and Google and MSN using www
    1. Yahoo at 13.8 billion
    2. Google at 9.1 billion
    3. MSN at 4.1 billion

    huhh!
  • Chtiwi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0voici une bonne explication en détail http://www.xcess.info/fr/comprendre_le_google_pagerank_en_detail_afr.aspx
  • anthony_rossi7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I got 9,130,000,000 results by searching just simply "a" (No quotations). Not as good as the rest of you but still not bad.
  • parrotscience, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So does this mean that if my site ranks at the 2 million mark on Alexa, I am in the top 2% if there are 8 billion pages?
  • dunkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0now this page ranks for 'poopstacker' - it's even number one... ruined!
  • deadpixel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0gebus people GET A LIFE
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...

© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.