5.73x10^1000000000
There you are then. Not that impressive, is it?
There you are then. Not that impressive, is it?
Where ↑ is the knuth uparrow notation, beats your example in only 4 symbols with about three thousand times as many digits
Which in my book is c, the speed of light in a vacuum, 299792458 m/s, a mere 9 digits, but inscribed in a circle using Steinhaus–Moser notation[1] is equivalent to a number so mindbogglingly big that I'm not even going to attempt to calculate its measure.[2]
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steinhaus%E2%80%93Moser_notatio...
[2]: Not that it makes any sense to perform this operation on c, but I think that use of © in this way is much more interesting than its current usage.
Aaronson's got a blog entry tangentially related to this competition
http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html
"In an old joke, two noblemen vie to name the bigger number. The first, after ruminating for hours, triumphantly announces "Eighty-three!" The second, mightily impressed, replies "You win.""
As someone who is genuinely interested in AI, I'm very curious if lateral thinking like we demonstrated can ever be matched by a machine. I'm watching things unfold with great interest.
Mere pessimism on my part about UTF-8 handling. Its standard notation. After all, its Knuth, therefore its standard.
Where ௸ is my own large number notation, beats your example in only 1 symbol with about 3 ↑↑ 4 times as many digits.