1. ## Googolplexian

Is this a real number which is recognised in the maths/science community?

I know what the number is suppose to be I just want to know if it is widely accepted as a number.

Thanks

2. The number is useless. It is never used anywhere in mathematics. And definitely not physics for there is not even enough atoms in the entire universe of 15 billions light years big containing trillions and trillions of super huge stars with each star containing quadrillions and quadrillions of atoms.

3. I know, it's useless and can't be used for anything because it's so big.

But is the name googolplexian regarded worldwide as the largest number with a name?

4. But is the name googolplexian regarded worldwide as the largest number with a name?
If you mean a Googolplex, then I guess so. The infinity is greater than this (but that's not a number!) and of course it's very important in maths, physics, etc.
From wikipedia, we can learn that despite its gigantic size, a Googolplex is smaller than $9^{9^{9^{9^{9^9}}}}$.

5. A google can have some signifigance in mathematics. For example, there are some result in number theory which were proven to work for large numbers. Such as the Goldbach Conjecture. I forget the number, but it was proven that for sufficiently large numbers the Goldbach Conjecture holds.

6. I have never heard it referred to as "googolplexian." I think the proper name is "googolplex."

However, I wouldn't say it's the largest named number, or the largest number with a concise, nonsystematic name. For that we have the absurdly large Graham's number,

$
G = \left.
\begin{matrix}
3\underbrace{\uparrow\ldots\uparrow}3\\
\underbrace{\vdots}\\
3\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow3
\end{matrix}
\right\}\text{64 layers}
$

which is not only many, many times larger than a googolplex, it has also actually been used in a mathematical proof.

7. But is the name googolplexian regarded worldwide as the largest number with a name?
What about $\aleph_0$ ? It has a name, it's far superior to a googolplex and is not the least one

8. Originally Posted by Moo
What about $\aleph_0$ ? It has a name, it's far superior to a googolplex and is not the least one
But it's not finite ....

9. Yep, I didn't get the right definition of "number"

10. Originally Posted by Moo
But it's countable o.O
No it's not. It's the cardinality of a countable set.

11. Originally Posted by Moo
What about $\aleph_0$ ? It has a name, it's far superior to a googolplex and is not the least one
Originally Posted by mr fantastic
But it's not finite ....
Originally Posted by Moo
Yep, I didn't get the right definition of "number"
Originally Posted by mr fantastic
No it's not. It's the cardinality of a countable set.
It depends on how you choose to define "number". Though it is possible to extend $+$ and $\cdot$ and exponentiation for all cardinal numbers $\aleph_{\alpha}$ it has no point outside of set theory. Therefore, like Mr.Fantastic said we do not think of it as a number. However, in the realm of set theory we regard the cardinals as numbers.

12. a Googolplexian is roughly how long it takes for a black hole to evaporate into nothing, at least thats how long it takes for the one at the center of the Andromeda Galaxy I think. I am pretty sure its probably the same for any black hole, but you'll have to ask Stephen Hawking.

13. Originally Posted by ~berserk
a Googolplexian is roughly how long it takes for a black hole to evaporate into nothing, at least thats how long it takes for the one at the center of the Andromeda Galaxy I think. I am pretty sure its probably the same for any black hole, but you'll have to ask Stephen Hawking.

14. I guess it is just dependent on the mass of the black hole so in theory there can be one that takes that long to evaporate. Since I have no idea how to solve to find the necessary amount of mass you can use this equation I guess.

ex:for the one solar mass black hole it takes 10^67 years to evaporate

15. Originally Posted by Moo
What about $\aleph_0$ ? It has a name, it's far superior to a googolplex and is not the least one
There is no largest transfinite number either:

$\aleph_0<2^{\aleph_0}<2^{2^{\aleph_0}}< ..$

RonL

Page 1 of 2 12 Last