 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)recycle big ...and 73 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614103 Today 16 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
eh hehe, let us know if your perception of time changes while doing so. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its all a human´s invention.... some of us are really genious but how close or far are our inventions from perfection? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ok , i would do anything to help advance the human race . |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think weapons are an excellent human invention. Especially weapons that kill w M w. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Fuck he went to sleep... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
letters are numbers and numbers are codes of construction and creation, number 3 is very common, number 7 is also a "magical" number. but its all about numbers, tho i just understand letters cos numbers and that playful logic scares me |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hmm I would say the biggest number is 9 huge magical significance plus beyond that you are just repeating all the numbers that came before it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Really though, I think I have found the theoretically biggest possible number in the universe. The mistake is thinking that you can go: 1,000,000,000,00... to infinite. Well numbers have to be stored somehow. So, assume that, say, an atom is the smallest unit in the universe capable of storing a number... then the largest stored number in the universe is limited by the number of atoms in the universe capable of storing it. This number is just a stored symbol though. The largest unstored number must be much much larger, though still limited by the universe's size. For example, for our purposes, assume that atoms are the smallest units in the universe. Then the number of every possible combination of atoms with every other possible combination must be the largest possible number. Then put that number as it's own exponent and repeat this operation per every unit of the smallest possible time. Or something. the problem is that everytime we think we find the smallest building block of the universe it ends up being composed of smaller building blocks. an overly simplified example: elements->atoms->subatmoic particles->quarks->strings i have my doubts as to whether or not this trend will ever stop. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah. And it will lead to that everything consists of everything. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
From what I recall the human mind can at most only look at 5 things as one set. After 5 the brain sees e.g. 6 as 2 sets of 3. 11 is therefore 2 sets of 5 and one set of 1. Or something like that, I get what you're saying. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah that's what I was trying to say in my posts (did you read them, or did you just post this without reading the thread?) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
have you heard of ? even if all the matter in the known universe was turned into ink, you couldn't write it even using exponents. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if all the matter in the universe turned into ink what would you write it on? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
so the real answer is 6 then? but yeah as you said before, my brain goes in lots of 5 at work when i count things for orders while another guy who works there goes in twos. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
45 000 000 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think nacmat's post count is in the top 5 biggest numbers, stored or theoretical. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Empty space. You'd just arrange the ink in patterns floating in nothing. Obviously, you'd use magic to hold it all in place and so on. I'd heard of Graham's number before. If you look at one of the links at the bottom of that page, by the way, you'll find out that it was proven last year that the answer isn't 6. It's at least 11. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Dozier > yeah, i asked myself that, too.... if all the matter of the universe was turned into ink, there would be no one to write and nothing to write on of course dumb scientists =P (but you see what they mean...) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well yeah, so the point is that the limit is whatever there is most of in the entire universe ie. number of sub-atomic thingys in existence/ever have existed/ever will exist because once a number is made higher than that, it cannot be used on anything and is then useless. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"there it is" - german guy in armadeus |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no it will conclude that everything consists of nothing, and vice versa. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
No, the largest number that can be explictly encoded in the universe is definitely higher than that - it's at least the number of combinations of states that all the tiniest things (provided there is such a thing) can be in. If, say, the universe consisted of the fingers on your left hand and nothing else (assuming your fingers can't be divided - you probably don't want to verify this bit experimentally, so we may never know whether it's true), the number definitely wouldn't just be five. For example, your fingers can be curled or outstretched - that means it's at least 25=32. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
this thread smells heavily of toasted almonds. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Everybody loves toasted almonds. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
24 is the highest number |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i don't agree. i would imagine that whatever the smallest thing is (if there is one) looks exactly like all the other smallest things. there would be no way to tell them apart, so having them arranged in different states would be pointless. your example about fingers only makes sense because fingers are almost probably not the smallest building blocks of the universe..they are complex arrangements of very tiny things and hence can be arranged in more ways than one. that's one thought, at least. another question is can there be just one common denominator to everything we know of: energy, forces, etc. maybe there must be? interesting questions for sure.. it's all really just an illusion that we can't see past to the Truth because we are trapped inside the system. that's the real problem, i think. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Problem is that atom is not smallest things where you can store numbers at. Biggest number is determined by the spin of ... argh how are those called... you know the most and basic unit that makes up a dimension..... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
careful or i'll shoot you with my tachyon beam |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
bignumber ++ |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Key_Secret: I read the previous posts but I thought of saying that stuff before I read your post :). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
If the "smallest things" exist and are indistinguishable (which I have to agree they probably would be), then all that means that you can't reliably order them and use that to increase the amount of information you can store in them, as you could with fingers, normally. You can still use the states they're in, though. In other words, if you can't tell which finger is which you can still tell (obviously if all the matter in the universe is being used there's no room for a human observer, but you know what I mean) how many are crooked and how many are straight. If that's the only information you have, there are only six distinguishable states of the universe, but if you can also know which fingernails are clean and which aren't, there are 56. (may have miscalculated there, I'm tired, but you get the idea) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you said yourself you would have to agree they are probably indistinguishable...... they either are or they are not. as an example, let's use an electron. the properties of electrons are well established, this is what makes them electrons and not one of the other particles. so, what kind of 'states' could the electron be in that make it distinguishable from all the other electrons? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
numbers are constructions made by the humans not real things. the only way there would be a 'biggest' number is that we could imagine a number that's bigger than any other number... this is clearly a very stupid idea since any number+1 is bigger. there are even numbers that can't be compared. also the notion of bigger and smaller was also created by the human mind.. so unless you're very stupid and uncreative there is no 'biggest number'. there are even inifities that are "bigger" that others and given any order of infiniti it's posiible (and easy) to construct one that's bigger |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
states like it's position or speed. can't be determined but are in an infinite range of posibilities determined only by porbability (wich isn't something that's "determined") |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
All true. We're currently talking about something else, though - what the biggest number that would "fit" in the universe might be. Dozier: of course, all this doesn't really make a lot of sense. I didn't start it. :) I'd need a solid grounding in advanced quantum physics trickery and necromancy to argue in detail about electrons, but there are various ways in which an electron can differ from another. Location (as far as I know that can only be determined as a probability field or something, but it can nonetheless be different between electron A and electron B). Momentum. Strength of pineapple smell. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"i would imagine that whatever the smallest thing is (if there is one) looks exactly like all the other smallest things. there would be no way to tell them apart, so having them arranged in different states would be pointless." ... whoa. But maybe only a human observers couldn't tell them apart. "numbers are constructions made by the humans not real things." ...whoa (again). Well mass would be here without human observers... eh, probably anyway... and when numbers are used to measure mass, they stand as symbols for it. So "numbers" would still be here, just not in their symbolized form for human convenience...? "also the notion of bigger and smaller was also created by the human mind" a foot is bigger than an inch... it doesn't seem like an artificial idea to me but rather a brain making a correct logical observance. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Numbers are just another way for the white man to hold down the black man. NUM83R5 4R3 4L50 4 W4Y 70 C0MMUN1C473. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
