Not to beat a dead horse, but big numbers aren't inherently interesting to describe.
There are integers bigger than any integer anyone has written down in any form. This particular integer is large, but "consumable". I guess I get tired of the "number of atoms in the observable universe" comparison. Plenty of integers this size or larger can be dealt with in other ways. (Think factoring). steve On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 2:11 AM, Olivier Teytaud <olivier.teyt...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> How do you know that an implicit expression (of length smaller than >> 10^80) of the number does not exist? :) >> > > I am pretty sure that such an implicit expression exists: it is << the > number of etc etc.... >> (formalized for your favorite set of rules :-) ). > > > > > -- > ========================================================= > Olivier Teytaud, INRIA TAO Research Fellow --- > http://www.slideshare.net/teytaud > "Please stop quoting me on internet."___ Albert Einstein > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > Computer-go@computer-go.org > http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@computer-go.org http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
