Graham's Number

Post #328,397 by pwhysall 6/22/10 3:15:38 PM Reply	Graham's Number Fuck me. http://en.wikipedia....i/Graham's_number >heady hurty<
Post #328,400 by Another Scott 6/22/10 3:34:04 PM Reply	Heh. :-) Indeed, the observable universe is far too small to contain an ordinary digital representation of Graham's number, assuming that each digit occupies at least one Planck volume. Nice find. Thanks. Cheers, Scott.
Post #328,419 by static 6/22/10 8:32:09 PM Reply	I've stumbled on that before. I was fascinated by Knuth's up-arrow notation and what it represented. And how it exponentiated exponentiation so bloody fast. Wade. Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers? A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
Post #328,464 by Ashton 6/23/10 3:20:51 PM Reply	$10^185 and 99 cents (for an average-sized Universe's allotment of Plancks) IF formerly, the aspiration of every greed-head (beyond some bias-level of insanity) -- was the acquiring of $,£,Â 10^185 + change? Lives there a greedhead today aiming for a $Graham + change? Surely Murica must be #1 in this pursuit. (As we can plainly see, avarice can transcend the largest silly-number imaginable; only homo-sap possesses such suicidal-hard-wiring.) Makes us kinda ____, or at least, ______, no? We've come a long way since 1929's fav ditty, Hey buddy, can ya spare a dime? I could almost see voting for Palin in 2012 on the grounds that this sorry ratfucking excuse for a republic, this savage, smirking, predatory empire deserves her. Bring on the Rapture, motherfuckers! -- via RC
Post #328,671 by Meerkat 6/26/10 9:44:02 PM Reply	Poor sod must never get called for a date with a # like that They said I was gullible ... and I believed them

Welcome to IWETHEY!