You are absolutely right, you can add more to any number. I think the reason there is no named number higher than a googleplex is that there is no PRACTICAL application for a number larger than that. Once you reach a number that is larger than all the sub-atomic particles of the known universe then there is probably not going to be much need for a larger number in a real world application.
2006-11-18 12:44:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by waldon l 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
OK, first of all, a googolplex is not 10*100. 1000 is 10*100. A googolplex is 10^(10^100). In other words, 10 raised to the power of a googol, or 10 followed by a googol of 0s.
As for why you can't add 1 to it, you can. No one is saying that there can't be a number higher than a googolplex. What they are saying is that you can't write down the number that "googolplex" represents--not in scientific notation, but writing the actual number--because there's not enough particles in the universe to write it with.
I never heard that story before. I would have thought there would be enough particles to write it. So I'm not saying I know for sure that you can't, just that that's what the people who say you can't are talking about.
2006-11-18 12:39:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by Amy F 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
10^100 is a googol. 10^googol is a googolplex.
And there's no need for a number higher than a googolplex because there's no need for one. As far as I know, even the total number of atoms in the entire universe isn't a googolplex. Nothing is that high, big, or long, so it'd be pointless to name numbers any higher.
2006-11-18 12:43:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by . 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why don't you define a new number, let's say a google to the googleplex power; call it a giggleplex, and you have a number above googleplex. Then you can define another new number, a googleplex to the giggleplex and call it a gagglexplex. Continue as long as you can think up names. What does it mean? Nothing. Such numbers may not exist as physical entities in nature, but that doesn't make them less valid as absolute numbers.
2006-11-18 12:46:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by gp4rts 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The number googolplex is not 10^100.
google is 10^100
googleplex is 10^(10^100) or 10^googleplex
largest named number is graham's number as mentioed below link
2006-11-18 12:56:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mein Hoon Na 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, yes you can add a 1 to googleplex, but if you had a name for every single number that existed, that would be an infinite number of words! We typically only give names to a few special types of numbers only.
Hope that helps!
~ ⥠~
2006-11-18 12:38:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by I ♥ AUG 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Mathematicians have no reason to name it. It would be very annoying to name every number, and plus there are unlimited numbers. So what if they don't have names?
BTW- a googleplex is 10^google;
a google is 10^100
2006-11-18 12:38:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mac Man 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Let's name it Googolplexone. Then by induction we could prove there are names of an infinite amount of numbers. Why? Because if we have Googolplexone then we can prove we have googlepextwo. By PMI we just proved that we have an infinite amount of numbers. Ha and Ahaa!
2006-11-18 12:43:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by BILL 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes - There is always a bigger number (ignoring the event of infinity).
Not all numbers have specific names.
2006-11-18 12:39:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by wilkes_in_london 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Googleplex plus one?
2006-11-18 12:42:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by F T 5
·
0⤊
0⤋