Tree 3 vs graham's number

Betty

Jun 15, 2025

7 min read

Even iterating the number of 3 3 's in the power tower 3 ↑ 3 ↑ ⋯ ↑ 3 3 ↑ 3 ↑ ⋯ ↑ 3 a googol times (starting with 333 3 3 3) will not get even close to Graham's . Not less than $100 million of annual sales.The expression for Graham's number is actually quite close, but for TREE(3) this is, again, just a very weak lower bound proven using some clever mathematics.It doesn't make a conceptual leap above what the TREE function can do anyway and is kind of similar to saying TREE (3) + 1.

TREE vs Graham's Number

When the input is 1 or 2, the length of the longest possible tree is small.Auteur : Numberphile

Graham's number

Main videos are ---What is GN: http://youtu.

Manquant :

How do we know that TREE(3) is bigger than Graham's Number?

Tony Padilla, Large Numbers, Big .

TREE数列

It's finite, but you're going to have to trust us.Graham's number only falls on OMEGA level. We say that two numbers are relatively the same when the ratio of their .

Can it be defined in terms of the things used in grahams number?

TREE(3) vs Loader's Number, which one is bigger : r/googology

so we likely have $f_{\omega+3}(3)=f_{\omega+2}(f_{\omega+2}(f_{\omega+2}(3)))$ to be much greater . Can it be defined in terms of the things used in grahams number? like g1 = 3 3 g2 = 3 (g1 up arrows) 3 g3 = 3 (g2 up arrows) 3 g64 = 3 (g63 up arrows) 3 . TREE (3) dwarfs big numbers like . Representation of the number is difficult, but one weak lower bound is AA(187196)(1), where A(n) is a version of the Ackermann function.

hyperoperation

Because of this, inserting the TREE function into Grahams number would .

The Graham Number itself is simple enough, and can be derived from rule #6 and #7 of Graham's rules for Defensive stocks.Rayo's number was the biggest number that came out of that competition. This is Numberphile.This course explores the concept of TREE of Graham's Number, delving into big numbers, the successor function, natural numbers, ordinal infinity, ordinal function, and omegas. So the first step of the Graham's function, 3↑↑↑↑3 = g 1, is very roughly A (6,6). Professor Tony Padilla on the epic number, TREE(3).We can define it, for instance as: A(4,2) = (2↑↑5) -3 If A(n) then A(n,n) which is (n↑^n+1) -3.basically graham's function with conway chains. When it is 3, the length is VERY VERY VERY long.

big numbers

Sbiis Saibian has in fact named it Conway's tetratri, from tetra meaning four and tri meaning three, indicating that the chain consists of four threes.Regarder la vidéo23:50The biggest number we've ever tackled - TREE of Graham's Number. So now we found a number bigger than graham’s number, TREE(3) Conclusion.Main video: https://youtu. We know TREE(3) exists, and we know it’s finite, but we do not know what it is or even how many digits there are.be/3P6DWAwwViUFeaturing Professor Tony Padilla.Website: http://www.I still dont understand how big Tree(3) is.I'm coming off this post which asks about the size of the number which we would obtain by replacing the 3's in Graham's number construction by TREE(3).ly/G_NumberA number so epic it will collapse your brain into a black hole! Yet Tony Padilla and Matt Parker . Possible such explanations could be 1000 to the power of 1000, or number of possible orders for a .com/playlist?list=PLDewy_4QBpjtYjxNVVRNrSaAIBSAOkBH6How do we know Rayo is bigger than Loader, TREE(3), Graham's n. There are (computable) numbers bigger than Loader's number which are mentioned in the googology link in my previous post .TREE(3) is a number almost defined by its indefinability: it’s enormous, but we can’t say how enormous; it’s finite, and we can prove it – except, we can’t actually prove it, because the .TREE(3) dwarfs big numbers like Graham’s number. The growth rate is ridiculous.

Eli5- what exactly is Rayo’s number?

Something about it just seems nice. Big numbers like Graham’s number are impossibly big, bigger than our universe.In mathematics, Kruskal's tree theorem states that the set of finite trees over a well-quasi-ordered set of labels is itself well-quasi-ordered under homeomorphic embedding. SCG (13) is much bigger than your K (3) and Loader's number is much bigger than SCG (13). Professor Tony Padilla on the epic number, TREE (3).

TREE(3) (extra footage)

6M views 6 years ago. An enormous number beyond our ability to express with written notation, beyond what we could even begin to comprehend, bigger than the notoriously gargantuan Graham’s number. We mainly post videos about mathematics and just numbers in general.Therefore Moser's number, although incomprehensibly large, is vanishingly small compared to Graham's number: TREE(3): appears in relation to a theorem on trees in graph theory. Open comment sort options. The second step g 2 is roughly A (g 1 ,g 1) and the actual .Thus TREE(3) > tree $_3$ (tree $_2$ (tree(8))).be/IihcNa9YAPkMore links & stuff in full. Hence iterated up-arrow operations have virtually no effect. GG26 3->3->3 3->3->3 is a number that has gotten some fame among the googology community. Long-term debt should not exceed the net current assets.

PUBLISHED April 7, 2023.Overview

Graham's Number on the Next Layer And TREE (3)

so can we do something like g1000000000000000000?

Graham’s number is effectively zero compared to TREE(3)

Continues at: .

Of course, the busy beaver numbers probably beat TREE (3) much sooner than that.com/playlist?list=PLDewy_4QBpjtYjxNVVRNrSaAIBSAOkBH6Even .A fun post on r/whowouldwin that compares the stats and abilities of Sylvester Graham, the inventor of the Graham cracker, and a white oak tree with all of its stats multiplied by .be/HX8bihEe3nAHow big is GN: http://youtu.

The Enormous TREE(3)

Additional information. Freelance Writer.TREE (3) vs Loader's Number, which one is bigger.

TREE[3]

TREE (3) is significantly harder to reach than Graham's number, as seen by .Graham's Number however, is smaller than TREE(3) by a significant margin (though is anything really significant once you've hit an incomprehensible size?) Share Sort by: Best.A (m,n)=2↑ (m-2) (n+3)-3.

The interesting thing about the TREE function is that it grows so rapidly eg.What is TREE(3)? It’s a number. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have . Really TREE(3) is vastly larger than g_A(187196), almost certainly vastly larger than g_g_A(187196) and g_g_g_A(187196) and g_g_g_g_A(187196) and so on for a very long way, but TREE is a .How big is TREE (3)? I still dont understand how big Tree (3) is.The number TREE(3), which comes from a simple combinatorial problem in graph theory, is proven to be finite, but unimaginably larger than the already . The number n. The number of digits in Graham‘s number dwarfs a googolplex.48M subscribers. Katie Spalding.Using this routine, we can show BB (2645) = Σ(2645, 2) Σ ( 2645, 2) is almost definitely bigger than TREE (3).Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem.Actually, Graham's number is now considered pretty small by mathematicians.See our other Graham's Number videos: http://bit.Supporting #TeamTrees on a quest to plant 20 million trees - https://www. The first answer there mentions that it'd be pretty much the same as TREE(3). If you know Conway-chains, they are .

Using The Graham Number Correctly

Graham's number, forAbout Press Copyright Contact us Creators Advertise Developers Terms Privacy Policy & Safety How YouTube works Test new features NFL Sunday Ticket .

Manquant :

What is larger?

TREE(3) – This enormous number arises from certain assignments in set theory. loader's by quite a lot.

(Explanation for beginners)

The level of TREE(3) T R E E ( 3) is unimaginably higher than that of Graham's number.

Kruskal's tree theorem

Manquant :

Oct 25 TREE v Graham's Number.

Continues at: https://youtu.