cheater_1's math and physics lesson.

Actually as far as 1x10^150! goes, you underestimate how big this number would be.  1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 x

999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 x 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999998 x 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999997

etc

Olimar, You mean that he use the word atom to describe the smallest particle in the universe since we're not sure wich one it is? If so then I'm a little confused over what exactly he is argumenting for. Is he trying to prove that no number can be bigger than the number of things there is to count in that system? If so then his reasoning makes even less sense to me.

sstteevveenn, that looks wrong.

That aside I've started to think about the permutations counter argument. Isn't it flawed? Can you really talk about different orders of a entire system that does not exist inside another system? If you have a system consisting of 6 particles then that's very different from having 6 particles inside a system. If you talk about different orders of the 6 particles then you're already assuming a bigger system where you place them. The permutation argument might fall shorthanded here.

It's pretty hard to evaluate the strength of the arguments here though since it's pretty hard to see what the argument is about. What is cheater_1's definition of a real and fake number?

If he define any number that's bigger than the number of atoms in the universe as false and only defines it by this then this is true by definition so it can't be proven false but it's a pretty useless definition. I'd like to know what makes 10^80 more real than 10^80 + 1.

if they do say that there is more chess combinations in the universe then atoms that is wrong because. there is matter and anti-matter(the opposite of matter) so you world have to double the number. like for example lets say that the number of atom combinations is 10^150, that is only the matter side then comes the anti-matter which also has 10^150. so then you add those together and bamm!! 20^300. more atoms then chess combinations problem solved.

You're wrong... it's 100^22500

haha, you guys...

1x10^150  x 2 =  2x10^150, ie still ~ 10^150

dunno where 10^150 came from anyway, cos the number of atoms is far less, at I think, about 10^79

Chess is theoretical, the pieces are real(except on the computer) but the game is in our heads.  By the Way, what was the whole point of this,

This thread would make any math teacher cry.

not to belabor the point, but quantum physics and common sense do NOT go hand in hand merrily on their way.

sstteevveenn theres no point teaching maath online..... if someone thinks 10^150 doubled is 20^300 they just need to take good maath class.

On August 23rd, a UCLA computer discovered the 45th known Mersenne prime, 2^43,112,609-1, a mammoth 12,978,189 digit number!

I hope this was flamebait. In contrast with infinity, Googolplex is a very real, very non-theoretical number. It didn't take my math degree to know that either. Please abstain from any future lessons outside of your area of expertise (cheating?). Thanks.

You can present the material, but you can't make us care. Therefore, we would have a much more productive day if classes are ended and all of the students are let out to the playground for the rest of the day. :)

GAH... they finally found it. i didn't know. i hadn't checked up on that in several months. OMG i've gotten so lazy since i graduated....... :(

p.s.-95% of the posts on this thread make me want to cry. I really want to know how many of the people actually believed what they typed and how many did it just to see if they can get idiots (like me) to keep reading nonsense.

-95%? 

Fun topic. I hope it cant be done.

Fine, here is an argument that will settle this once and for all:

Cheater has set his constraints to do with the "amount" of matter in the universe- a spacial concept where there is a finite amount of it.  However what's to stop the constraints having something to do with time, which as far as we know is infinite.  If this number of games could theoretically be demonstrated over a length of time (which again as far as we know can be divided ad infinitum) then what's to stop this huge number "existing."

My head hurts!

broze, no I meant that you were very right and that the thread could have ended at that post. The rest of my post was aimed at others.

Is there intelligent life on this site? It's debatable. Just because I can write a number down DOES NOT make it real. Something like googol! (googol factorial)is NOT REAL. It denotes NOTHING. It's imaginary. Theoretical. Infinity is a CONCEPT (infinity cannot exist). If infinity were to exist, then my point would be proven because infinite time and space means infinite atoms. GOTCHA!

Theoretical numbers are confusing. Even professors who do not possess an expanded mind get boggled. Another example of a theoretical number is that If something is composed of 10^20 atoms that it is actually composed of 4x10^20 quarter atoms. That particular number DOES NOT EXIST because it does not denote anything and has never been achieved.

Remember students, we must confine ourselves to the limits of what we are talking about. When dealing with a 16 fluid ounce glass, NO AMOUNT OF ANYTHING can be contained inside that glass that EXCEEDS 16 ounces. You may have 16 ounces of water in that glass, 16 ounces of gasoline or 16 ounces of liquid concrete. The weight may differ, but you MAY not exceed 16 ounces. It's like what weighs more, a ton of feathers or a ton of bricks? They weigh the SAME!

Another example, students. I'm going to make it a little easier for you all to grasp. Single syllables if I can. Universe = 5 gallon bucket. Compare Atoms/chess combinations to atoms/# of pieces of glass in bucket.

Universe contains 10^81 atoms.

Bucket is full of glass shards. Total volume is 5 gallons. Total weight is 15 pounds. Total atoms is 10^10 (arbitrary #).

Glass is broken into tiny pieces. Melted into liquid form, ground into dust, etc. The numbers cannot ever SURPASS the initial values. It is physically impossible. The maximum containment is 5 gallons or 15 pounds or 10^10 atoms, etc.

Universe's maximum containment is 10^81 atoms. Sure, I can write a number like 10^99999, but it CANNOT be contained within the container that is the universe. Hard to grasp, I know. "But cheater_1, there are 15 pounds of liquid in the bucket and 15 surpasses 5. Your argument is INVALID. You are comparing apples and oranges."

Good observation, but INCORRECT. You are comparing pounds and gallons--NO FAIR. "But cheater_1, you are comparing atoms to # of chess moves. No Fair."

Nice try again young children, but you are MISSING THE POINT!! Atoms are the building blocks of everything as we know it. Nothing can exist without atoms. Chess pieces and chess boards and yes, even SPACE ITSELF is composed of atoms. To say that there are more potential moves in chess than what the entire universe is made up of (a universe that CONTAINS CHESS) would be like saying that when I break apart a marble sculpture that initially weighs 1000 pounds, that I will end up with 1001 pounds of broken marble pieces. IMPOSSIBLE!!!

It's late and you all are tired. Go to bed. Think on this. You will see the light. No REAL number can exist that is in excess of 10^81 if 10^81 is indeed the total number of what the universe is made up of.

SCHOOL IS RECESSED.

I think Cheater_1 is the same guy who came up with the TimeCube.