Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Anuj Kejriwal
Grade 11
Introduction
When asked to select a topic to investigate, I was bewildered. Many of the topics
required skills we hadn't even scraped the surface of as yet. However, one of these
topics was particularly interesting: Graham’s Number. It is a number so big, that if
one was to try and comprehend it in his/her mind, the information would be so
complex that his/her mind would in fact collapse into a blackhole. This is in fact not
exaggeration. The data content of the number is gargantuan and transcends the
amount of entropy that could be processed or even stored in a space the size of
our brain 1. It is impossible to visualize a number this big.
Take for example, a knowingly huge number, googol. The number is equivalent to
10100 - 1 with a 100 zeroes after it, or -
10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00
0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
Now, a googolplex, is 10googol -
1010,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
These numbers are unimaginably big. To write out the actual number googolplex,
considering one writes 2 digits a second, it would take 1.51×1092 years, which is
1.1×1082 times the actual age of the universe 2.
1http://ibmathsresources.com/2013/04/15/grahams-number-literally-big-enough-to-collapse-
your-head-into-a-black-hole/
2 http://www.googolplexwrittenout.com
The question
Graham was trying to solve a problem in the Ramsey theory. This theory is the facet
of mathematics that investigates under which conditions, what kind of order must
occur3. Such kind of investigation occurs in many aspects of science as well. For
example, Physics. When studying the collision theory, physicists put many
conditions on the two objects colliding in order to derive certain rules and figures.
Figure 1 Figure 2
3 http://www.numdam.org/item?id=CM_1935__2__463_0
4 http://isu.indstate.edu/ge/GEOMETRY/cubes.html
However, if the bottom edge of figure 2 was colored blue instead, it would no longer
satisfy the conditions.
And so, what the question really wants, is that no matter how one
color’s the said shape, it should always have a complete
subgraph of a single-colored 4-vertex coplanar.
To investigate such a question by trial and error proves greatly difficult because of
the complexity of shapes with increasing dimensions -
Power towers initiate with the topmost number and then operate downwards.
So, 2 2 = 24 = 16
2
33
Now, if one looks at the example of # 33
33 ( 33)
# 33 = # 33 = # 33 = # 3(3 = # 37,625,597,484,987
27 27 )
4↑↑5 = # 4 44
5↑↑2 = # 5 5
aa
Tetration = a↑↑b = a↑(a↑(…↑a)) =# a a } b copies of a
The first deriving term is called # g1 and it is equivalent to 3↑↑↑↑3 and 3↑↑↑↑3 =
3↑↑↑(3↑↑(3↑↑3))
But first -
3=3
# 33 = 27
# 33 = 7,625,597,484,987
3
33
# 33 = a 3.6 trillion digit number
3
33
# 33 = 3 raised to a 3.6 trillion-digit exponent
When looking at power towers, the right most digits ‘d’ of the multiplied form
remain same provided that the power tower has a height of more than ‘d’+2.
Using the same rule, we can form a table to obtain the last three digits-
(01,03,…87,… (03,27,…83,…
2 (27,87) (87) (87) (87)
67) 87)
remainder.
However, if were to divide this number by # 10 2 , the remainder would be 87. This
shows that when looking at number of digits d, a power tower of height greater
than d+2 gives the same remainder, when divided by #10 d .
Modular exponentiation takes the form # c = b e mod m
c = remainder
b = base
e = exponent
# b e = dividend
m = divisor
x = # 3x mod # 10 d .
# 33 = 27
27# ÷ 10 = 2, remainder 7
# 33 = 7,625,597,484,987
3
The value of has to be an exponent multiple of 3, since only then will it be part of
Graham’s number. Using this equation, the values for the 12 rightmost digits of
Graham’s number can be found - …262464195387.
An algorithm derived by this equation was able to give the last 500 digits of
Graham’s Number.
The question was derived from a similar question which asked the smallest value of
n for which only 3 coplanar vertices were completely sub graphed…
The answer to that was # 6 ≤ x .
Thus Graham derived that in order for his conditions to coexist, the number of
dimensions would have to be between 6 and a very very great number. So great,
that it can't be completely expressed in any notation currently existing. Another
mathematician, Jerome Barkley, specified this to 13. This answer, 13≤ N* ≤ g64 is in
fact an immensely specific answer, because there is no practical method to
investigate this beyond the 13th, 14th or the 20th dimension.
Conclusion
The reason Graham’s number is recognized is because it isn't just a random large
number, but because it is a part of the proof to a mathematical question.
Today, there are other notations such as the Steinhaus–Moser notation 5 that allow
us to produce numbers such as the Skewes’ Number 6. These are also part of
mathematical proofs to various questions.
The challenge when dealing with such numbers is the fact that there is no way of
digitally representing such numbers. Thus it is impossible to visualize, calculate with
or operate on any of such numbers.
5 http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Steinhaus-MoserNotation.html
6 http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SkewesNumber.html