• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Reply to: Number Crunching

Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Number Crunching"

Collapse

  • RichardCranium
    replied
    I bet they caught the BIGGEST NUMBER EVER of the HEAVIEST FISH EVER










    but they got away.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    So - how was the fishing ?

    Leave a comment:


  • scotspine
    replied
    the fishing was rained off. we were halfway out of town this morning at 5.30 when a text came through saying that the river was in the fields.

    off tomorrow again though

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    Originally posted by scotspine View Post
    i'm afraid that even with your perspicacity alf, the incalculable shall remain, for the time being at least, the incalculable. it's a pet hobby of mine [prime number distribution/prediction] and it's almost as elusive as the salmon i'll be chasing tomorrow. had 2 [returned] on monday and hoping for greater things tomorrow.

    Aye SP

    In the same way that Grey Slates remain - Grey Slates - sadly the incalculable will remain - incalculable.

    How did you get on with the Fishing ?
    Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 20 August 2009, 14:58.

    Leave a comment:


  • scotspine
    replied
    i'm afraid that even with your perspicacity alf, the incalculable shall remain, for the time being at least, the incalculable. it's a pet hobby of mine [prime number distribution/prediction] and it's almost as elusive as the salmon i'll be chasing tomorrow. had 2 [returned] on monday and hoping for greater things tomorrow.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    Originally posted by scotspine View Post
    i suspect he meant the visible universe?

    i was interested in how some of cantor's stuff impacted on the riemann hypothesis linky and how mandelbrot's work in the imaginary field could be inducted via cantor into it. i suspect a link between them all and a computer which can handle the production of large primes would help.
    Good point ScotsPine - I tend to view the Universe from a broader EMS spectrum - Infra Red and Microwave being the rage this weather - as pretty as the visible universe(s) are ... but the trouble with Infinity is - well where does it all end ?

    Fascinating thought about your Prime Number generator computer concept - or perhaps you have a prototype - could we - dare we ? - calculate the incalculable ?

    Find out !
    Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 19 August 2009, 21:24.

    Leave a comment:


  • scotspine
    replied
    i suspect he meant the visible universe?

    i was interested in how some of cantor's stuff impacted on the riemann hypothesis linky and how mandelbrot's work in the imaginary field could be inducted via cantor into it. i suspect a link between them all and a computer which can handle the production of large primes would help.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    Originally posted by PerlOfWisdom View Post
    No, that's a googol. A googolplex is ten to the power of a googol.

    It's impossible to write the number, it has 10^100 digits which is more than the number of atoms in the universe.
    Interesting - however - you specified a finite number for the number of atoms in the universe - which is fine if you subscribe to the view of the Universe as finite as the Aristotle camp does, even though we cannot be certain just how many atoms exist in the 'Finite' Universe - and to make it all more baffling - how do you classify and quantify the atomic structure of Dark Matter ?

    But there is another school of thought which maintains that the Universe is Infinite - and that would imply an infinite number of atoms.

    Then along comes Cantor who maintains there are in fact Three Levels of Infintity.

    But in an Infinite Universe(s) - an Finite Universe must also exist - its all enough to give one a bit of a headache.


    My take ?


    Appoximately Infinite - more or less Incalculable.``

    Whoops - got to dash - rice puddings getting burnt !
    Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 19 August 2009, 21:09.

    Leave a comment:


  • RichardCranium
    replied
    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
    And therefore it follows that no computer has ever calculated anything positive.
    You're confusing computers in general with Marvin the Paranoid Android.

    Leave a comment:


  • VectraMan
    replied
    Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
    One. It puts lots of them in a row to create the impression of representing bigger numbers; but that's just a matter of interpretation.
    Even that is a matter of interpretation. A single digit 1 would be -1 in twos compliment. So actually the largest (highest) number ever calculated by a computer is zero. But the largest in magnitude is -1.

    And therefore it follows that no computer has ever calculated anything positive.

    Leave a comment:


  • HairyArsedBloke
    replied
    Originally posted by PerlOfWisdom View Post
    No, that's a googol. A googolplex is ten to the power of a googol.

    It's impossible to write the number, it has 10^100 digits which is more than the number of atoms in the universe.
    Wot, all of 'em.

    Leave a comment:


  • NickFitz
    replied
    Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock View Post
    Does anybody happen to know the largest number ever calculated by a Computer ?
    One. It puts lots of them in a row to create the impression of representing bigger numbers; but that's just a matter of interpretation.

    Leave a comment:


  • PerlOfWisdom
    replied
    Originally posted by RichardCranium View Post

    The largest number with a name is a googolplex which is only 100 digits long. I think Python's inbuilt calculator can handle numbers that big. If not, there are free downloadable long number calculators that definitely can.
    No, that's a googol. A googolplex is ten to the power of a googol.

    It's impossible to write the number, it has 10^100 digits which is more than the number of atoms in the universe.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
    My software sometimes accidentally calculates infinity.

    Do I win?

    Thanks for your help Boys !

    I liked HABs response - cheeky ! - good to see HABs cheered up and no longer worrying himself senseless about Cosmic debris catastrophes - oh thats torn it !

    VectraMan - very very warm - because I heard in a bar once the biggest number ever calculated was appoximately Infinite by an IBM SuperDuper 4341 Computer - you know what I came back with ?

    What colour was the computer ?

    He nearly spat his lager out at that one !

    Weekend everybody !
    Last edited by AlfredJPruffock; 14 August 2009, 12:50.

    Leave a comment:


  • DimPrawn
    replied
    Originally posted by AlfredJPruffock View Post
    Does anybody happen to know the largest number ever calculated by a Computer ?
    17523.89

    HTH

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X