Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

I got the idea from a competition made,I don't know where and when,and had the purpose of finding the biggest number you can find.

What is not allowed is using non-real numbers,loose language and unclear references. I.e.:

"The biggest number you can imagine";

"The number you think of plus one"

And

"Infinity"

Are not allowed.

You can specify your number with digits clear wording,mathematical notation or a combination of the three. Your number must also be computable in a reasonable amount of time (e.g. Within half a year ).

It is also not in the fashion of the game to start of with the biggest numbers you can make. I will be modest and start with the lowest integer known to man:

1

*Note:As the game progresses I may need to change or add some rules,and they will be added here if neccessary.*

*Last edited by anonimnystefy (2012-05-03 07:24:13)*

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

1.(9)

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**John E. Franklin****Member**- Registered: 2005-08-29
- Posts: 3,552

2 > 1.(9) by an infintesimal amount so close to zero, you can't see it, it has no notatable value we currently no of I guess.

But I think 2 is larger because imagine if you have lived an infinite times before now and there was no beginning. Guess what, you could have lived all those infinite lifetimes in countries that have an even number of letters in their name. Some other guy could have lived in the odd number of letters countries. So as you can see infinity, even though it can go forever and ever, it can still be confined, and one infinity can be a subset of another infinity. Such as the number line going negative forever, but then you can creep forward on the number line each lifetime counting yet more lifetimes, and still you will never get to the right side of the infinite line, in fact, you might argue, you can never even get to the zero in the middle, which means we might still be way back near infinity in the negative and don't expect ever to get very far at this rate...

**igloo** **myrtilles** **fourmis**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

Hi JEF

Until you prove by a formal method that 2>1.(9) I cannot take you number to be greater.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**John E. Franklin****Member**- Registered: 2005-08-29
- Posts: 3,552

Sorry, I don't do formal proofs until I turn 65 and so thats a couple decades off when I'm smarter.

We'll talk then somemore.

**igloo** **myrtilles** **fourmis**

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

Then I cannot accept 2 as it is the same as 1.(9).

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

Ok. In that case I'll have

where n is the value of the number in post #200 of this thread.

Bob

You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

Hi bob

Didn't you see the rule about unclear references?

*Last edited by anonimnystefy (2012-05-11 19:39:48)*

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

hi Stefy,

Yes I've read the rules. I think it is clear.

Have you so little faith in your thread that you think it won't go to post #200?

When that post is reached, we'll know the exact value of my number.

But if it will make you happy I'll replace it with

Bob

You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

4!

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

Clarity?

Is that factorial 4 or 4 exclamation

Bob

You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

Factorial.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

B

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

%!

(% means your post because it is the latest one)

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

It looks like you're scoring my effort as zero out of zero.

As that it indeterminate, I choose that it is worth 100! (exclamation, not factorial ... that would be silly!)

Bob

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

No,that is not it.I am using your number ( 25 ) and am adding a factorial sign to it.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

Oh I see. So your number is 25!

So you have decided to abandon "modesty" as in "I will be modest and start with the lowest".

I had interpreted that as "Don't go up too quickly."

Adjusting criteria ........................................................

So I'll have

(25!)!

Your number must also be computable in a reasonable amount of time (e.g. Within half a year ).

Are you expecting me to prove my number meets this requirement, because I might change my mind about it.

Bob

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

Yup.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

Oh dear!

Adjusting submission ....................................................................

I'll have

Bob

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

Interesting number.

26!

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

The otherwise is a 'catchall' that I think is unnecessary since n is an integer and pi is irrational.

Bob

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

That number seems to be negative.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

Not if I've constructed it correctly.

Let's recap.

I want a certain number, lets's call it m for the moment.

m will be strictly between 0 and pi/4 OR strictly between pi/4 and pi/2

If the former I will make a multiplier out of cot(m) and if the latter, I will make a multiplier out of tan(m)

As a result I will have a multiplier that is > 1.

I will make your number bigger by that amount.

Now to construct m.

I will take your number and subtract multiples of pi/2 from it until I reach a value < pi/2.

This number will not be 0, not pi/4, not pi/2 because if it takes any of these values your number = multiple of pi/4 and we know your number is an integer.

So call this number m. Decide which range it is in and multiply your number by cot(m) or tan(m). The result is a number bigger than yours.

I think I should have said

Bob

Offline

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,813

That now might be correct,but in the original post you wrote cot(n) !!!

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bob bundy****Moderator**- Registered: 2010-06-20
- Posts: 6,097

Yes, I know. Mea culpa!

Bob

Offline