Comments by "XtreeM FaiL" (@XtreeM_FaiL) on "Graham's Number - Numberphile" video.

  1. Jason Medina Last digit is usually easy. Very simple ex. 4321×1234=? Last digit is 4. What is the 1st?
    2
  2. Brittany A Googolplex is less than a tear in a ocean compared to Graham's number.
    1
  3. 1st. what is Gramms number? 2nd. 10^10^10^1.3134 ain't that big of a number.
    1
  4. D K Bigger yes, but the answer is wrong then.
    1
  5. Bigger than what?
    1
  6. XevianLight Arrow notation is way crazier than exponents.
    1
  7. If you put googolplex^googolplex and zero near the G64, you can't tell the difference. IDK how you could do that, but... If you use exponentials only and write googolplex^googolplex^googolplex^googolplex... You will get nowhere near the Graham's number.
    1
  8. G64. Next!
    1
  9. Short answer, no. Long answer, nooooooooooo. If you take the smalles know volume, which is the Planc volume and count it as a one digit of the Graham's number. Then you start filling the known universe one digits after another. When you have used last empty space, you have used practically 0% of all the digits you have at the start.
    1
  10. Itz_only James Liar.
    1
  11. Itz_only James Is that really g2?
    1
  12. Itz_only James It does not look that big (long), but then again my head explode at g1.
    1
  13. Itz_only James That was kind of my point originally.
    1
  14. Enzo Tatsuro Pi is a number. So g64 vs Pi. G64 won by one alphapet.
    1
  15. Not only it ws used, but the results is straight from the calculation.
    1
  16. RANT That is like asking why stop making a bridge when it already reach from shore to shore.
    1