|
|
#111
05-29-2007, 03:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
thinking about a googolplex makes my head explode my first thought is that C isn't used, with just As and Bs. 
|
|
#112
05-29-2007, 06:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
[ QUOTE ]
Way to steal David's thunder jackass. Who would've known someone else could solve the answers using mathecamatics. [/ QUOTE ] some things you may want to consider before you go around calling people a 'jackass': 1. The thread has been dead for pretty much a week. 2. There was actually a LOT of math work done in this thread before I ever even posted here. Scroll up, look in white in particular. 3. It's a subject that appealed to me, somebody was asking for help, and I felt the best thing to do would be to try to help them. It is the science, MATH, and philosophy forum, you know. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] cheers
|
|
#113
05-29-2007, 06:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
Sorry, quick question about a googolplex.
It is googol X googol, so mathematically speaking, it's a 1 with 200 zeroes behind it, yes?
|
|
#114
05-29-2007, 06:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
nevermind. Just researched it. A one with a googol zeroes. Got it. LOL yeah, none of those examples are remotely C. Especially since my grandmother is an awesome bowler, and she didn't even hit her stride till her late 80's.
|
|
#115
05-29-2007, 10:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Hey Dave, You mind answering these also? Thanks, Jogger [/ QUOTE ] I don't want to steal david's thunder, but most of these are pretty easy to figure out and should be very clear which category they fall in. For example, question number 1 can be written as 50,000,000^100, assuming the probability of winning the lottery = 1 in 50 million. Obviously more than 10^100, but still approximately 0% to one/googolplex, so the answer is B. [/ QUOTE ] What are the answers to 2, 4 (include your assumption for play frequency) and 5-6? [/ QUOTE ] going on the assumption that these are all unrelated, independent events, white: <font color="white"> 2. Let's say the guy gets 500 AB a year, which is obviously a low estimate for an everyday MLB player. It also makes things conveniently simple for me. 2% chance of a HR/at-bat, so 1 in 50^500, B. 4. I think this question was specifically asked because this is largely a poker forum and the answers would heavily be swayed towards C. Same thing would happen if say, you posted a 'basketball miracle' on an NBA forum. An english or literary major would almost certainly feel the same way about #5. Anyway, the probability of hitting a pat royal flush on any given deal is 1 in 649,740. Let's just say 1 in a million. Let's say it's played a billion times. 1,000,000^1,000,000,000 clearly more than 10^100. Still about 0% to 10^googol. So B. It's really hard to explain the difference between googol and 10^googol. Like, you take 10^100 and get a googol (more than the number of atoms in the universe with about 20 orders of magnitude to spare). So you take 10^googol, crazy stuff. 5. hmmmm, taking a (educated) guess, it should most certainly be B. I don't claim to be an english or shakespeare? master, but say there are 100 sounds in our language and 10,000 words in hamlet. Say each word has 5 individual sounds. 100^50,000, so B. 6. Golf question. This is far from correct, but take any reasonable X^Y and you will get B. X = chance of making long shot; Y = number of occurances. Take any not-so-reasonable X^Y and you still get B. Hope this helps and you enjoyed it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] sorry david </font> [/ QUOTE ] I did! Thanks for the reply! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#116
05-31-2007, 01:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
[ QUOTE ]
googol = 10^100, such a massive number it's beyond comprehension. googolplex = 10^googol = not really sure how to describe it. Just say infinite instead its the same thing basically. [/ QUOTE ] 1 is as close to infinity as a googleplex so that makes no sense [ QUOTE ] thinking about a googolplex makes my head explode my first thought is that C isn't used, with just As and Bs. [/ QUOTE ] agree to quote carl sagan in cosmos(greates science documentary ever) "A piece of paper large enough to contain all the zeroes in a googleplex could'nt be stuffed into the known universe"
|
|
#117
05-31-2007, 01:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] googol = 10^100, such a massive number it's beyond comprehension. googolplex = 10^googol = not really sure how to describe it. Just say infinite instead its the same thing basically. [/ QUOTE ] 1 is as close to infinity as a googleplex so that makes no sense [ QUOTE ] thinking about a googolplex makes my head explode my first thought is that C isn't used, with just As and Bs. [/ QUOTE ] agree to quote carl sagan in cosmos(greates science documentary ever) "A piece of paper large enough to contain all the zeroes in a googleplex could'nt be stuffed into the known universe" [/ QUOTE ] What font size? 'Cause, like, sure if its 12 point Arial double-spaced or something but...
|
|
#118
05-31-2007, 02:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] googol = 10^100, such a massive number it's beyond comprehension. googolplex = 10^googol = not really sure how to describe it. Just say infinite instead its the same thing basically. [/ QUOTE ] 1 is as close to infinity as a googleplex so that makes no sense [ QUOTE ] thinking about a googolplex makes my head explode my first thought is that C isn't used, with just As and Bs. [/ QUOTE ] agree to quote carl sagan in cosmos(greates science documentary ever) "A piece of paper large enough to contain all the zeroes in a googleplex could'nt be stuffed into the known universe" [/ QUOTE ] What font size? 'Cause, like, sure if its 12 point Arial double-spaced or something but... [/ QUOTE ] If they were the size of an atom they might fit ok. Taking the Diameter of an atom to be 10^(-8) cm, you could fit 10^24 zeros of that size in a cubic centimeter. With 10^80 atoms in the Universe you could do it if you have 1 cubic centemeter of open space in the Universe for every atom in the universe, which seems likely to me. I'm not sure where you would get paper as thin as an atom though. What would you make it out of? Of course that's just the zeros in a googolplex. There's only a googol of those. PairTheBoard
|
|
#119
05-31-2007, 09:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] googol = 10^100, such a massive number it's beyond comprehension. googolplex = 10^googol = not really sure how to describe it. Just say infinite instead its the same thing basically. [/ QUOTE ] 1 is as close to infinity as a googleplex so that makes no sense [ QUOTE ] thinking about a googolplex makes my head explode my first thought is that C isn't used, with just As and Bs. [/ QUOTE ] agree to quote carl sagan in cosmos(greates science documentary ever) "A piece of paper large enough to contain all the zeroes in a googleplex could'nt be stuffed into the known universe" [/ QUOTE ] probably a poor choice of words by me, but I hope others got the gist of what I was trying to say.
|
|
#120
05-31-2007, 05:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: One In A Googol vs One In A Googolplex
I don't think any of these can possibly be C.
C requries a seemingly infinitly possible event occuring over an infinately big distance for an infinite number of times. I.e. the chances of every electron in the world forming a line in the molocule parallel to every other electron line in the universe.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
