(February 18, 2018 at 11:18 am)polymath257 Wrote: I just found this link. It has a fairly good, but technical description and characterization of large numbers. TREE(3) is not described (at least not from what I skimmed).
http://www.mrob.com/pub/math/largenum.html
(February 18, 2018 at 10:04 am)Grandizer Wrote: So I finally got around to reading the first link, and HOLY FUCK! I didn't even know how badly Graham's number paled in comparison to Tree(3). Tree(3) is to Graham's Number as Graham's Number is to any number that we can conceive of without going insanity to the googolthe power! It's FUCKING HUGE, WAY WAY WAY WAY HUGER THAN GRAHAMS NUMBER!!!!!! It's "makes me want to commit suicide" HUGE (joking, joking, but it almost makes me feel this way).
And, just to blow your mind further, look at the SSCG function.
SSCG(3) is *much* larger than TREE(TREE(TREE(.....TREE(3)...))) where the number of appearances of TREE is TREE(3).
And it comes up in actual mathematics!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman%2...G_function
And for more discussion:
http://googology.wikia.com/wiki/Googology_Wiki
TREE(3) of them? Explosion galore!!!
Whats just as crazy is that TREE(2) is just 3, but then add one level and its GHDHFNJFNVNVDHHXHXXJXJXBFHFBDJDJJDHDHFHDJDJXHHXHHDHXJXJCHCHCJCJCJCJCJCJXJJXHXHXHZBDBDBDBHSJJSJSJDFC
