« first day (35 days earlier)      last day (1463 days later) » 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 00:00

12:22 AM
@CM_Dayton: Sure. Build yourself a couple of (really) big radar stations pulsing out at the right frequency and you could look almost exactly like a pulsar. Come to think of it, that explains why we haven't found the aliens yet... — Joe Bloggs 6 hours ago
 
i dont know what you're talking about
what competition?
what number?
 
oh
i've been busy
been making a secret thingy
 
Ah
I knew you were up to no good
@S.C.B. :P There be mine number for you
 
OK.
 
12:30 AM
of course I'm up to no good
im always misbehaving
 
tis called sarcasm
geez
 
Nope
You are definitely up to no good
I can see it in your eyes.
 
what eyes?
 
Those eyes
points to the profile picture
 
12:33 AM
those aren't my eyes
and I assure you
that guy ain't causing trouble
 
>.>
I'll still be watching you...
 
you cannot watch me
im no longer on stack exchange
 
I can definitely feel it. The evil is like radiation.
 
too busy
you're probably just sensing my general need to hide things from my family.
even though it serves no purpose
shrugs
 
12:36 AM
weird
it showed me a location in China
sure that thing ain't broken?
:/
 
Meh
I don't know
 
well
 
...?
what's the no for?
 
12:38 AM
you broke dude?
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt would 9 arrow (9 arrow (9 arrow (...))) beat your number?
seems like a logical guess at it
also
 
@TheGreatDuck How many arrows?
 
however many I can write in 256 characters.
 
and clearly the competition concerns finite numbers
 
12:41 AM
:p
 
@TheGreatDuck Nope, too small
Way too small
 
oh
not even google level?
 
and which direction is the arrow?
 
huh?
 
googol? Sure, it beats that
 
12:41 AM
isn't the arrow just a notation for power tower?
 
@TheGreatDuck AFAIK, there are 3 different types of arrows. I assume you are referring to the one in my post
 
O.O
=> is implication
 
yeah it is
:p
 
I mean 3 different arrows for large numbers
 
12:42 AM
oh
 
-> is Conway's right arrow
^ is Knuth's up-arrow
 
well...
 
v is just the down-arrow
:|
 
give the evaluation of some point on a function and I can get a larger number.
wanna know how?
 
...how... -_-
 
12:43 AM
I take the integral from 0 to that point of the absolute value of the function.
 
-_-
You don't have enough characters to write that
 
just saying
 
since I already used up 256 characters in my code
 
i can remove a few and beat ya.
ill look at it later
 
:|
Well, copying my number is clearly cheating
and you'll get disqualified if you do that
 
12:44 AM
of course
im not entering the comp
 
im just speaking about numbers
 
But you basically have forever to do the contest
and coding is super easy. @S.C.B. learned a bit in a week, I learned a bit in 3 weeks
 
and I dont have to submit that as an answer
 
enough to code my number
 
12:46 AM
"coding"
in what language?
 
what programming language?
 

The big number (256) contest

2 hours ago, 6 minutes total – 5 messages, 1 user, 1 star

Bookmarked 1 hour ago by Simply Beautiful Art

@deostroll Right above there be the rules btw mate
@TheGreatDuck And now that you reminded me, I know have used only 255 characters
oops, I mean 256
but I made my number bigger
 
1:18 AM
Any idea on the problem I gave you?
lol, I think we need to make MIT great again.
9
Q: MIT 2015 Integration Question

Teh RodSo one of the question on the MIT Integration bee has baffled me all day today $$\int_{0}^{\frac{\pi}{4}}\frac{\tan^2 x}{1+x^2}\text{d}x$$ I have tried a variety of things to do this, starting with Integration By Parts Part 1 $$\frac{\tan x-x}{1+x^2}\bigg\rvert_{0}^{\frac{\pi}{4}}-\int_{0}^{\frac...

@SimplyBeautifulArt
 
@S.C.B. they just wrote 2 instead of -2
 
MIT or the OP?
@Starfall
 
MIT
just a silly typo
 
Still, strikes me that they should have checked.
 
1:21 AM
it's a dumb integration bee
 
Yeah, the problems are not even very difficult.
Or very interesting.
 

The big number (256) contest

2 hours ago, 6 minutes total – 5 messages, 1 user, 1 star

Bookmarked 2 hours ago by Simply Beautiful Art

@Moo
@S.C.B. By the way, the function I'm showing off is a function I named THING_4
In general, THING_{n+1}>THING_n
._. Saving the general THING_n for later
 
Among other things.
Why don't you name it BIGFUNCTION
seems more creative than THING
Or LARGE_4
 
Why don't you name it SIMPLYBEAUTIFULART_4
 
1:26 AM
There's even a number named "fish"
 
There're functions called Busy Beavers as well.
Wierd names IMO.
Why Beavers?
Or why the fish?
 
I'll name my number SBA4
:|
 
1:43 AM
When do you sleep, @Simply
 
Usually in 15-75 minutes from now
@Starfall Do you know if my function is computable/Turing complete?
 
can you write a program to compute it
 
Oh, ok
didn't quite know if it was that simple
 
Hmm. Can your output be larger than $9 \rightarrow 9 \rightarrow 9 \rightarrow 9 \rightarrow 9$? I didn't make it yet, but I certainly am curious.
 
I would imagine
but I can't grasp either Conway's arrow well nor my function
 
1:51 AM
Same.
 
So.... that feeling when you post a ton of ideas to the OP and then you realize they asked for complex analysis methods in their tags.
0
Q: Improper integral of $\frac{\log\left(\sqrt{x^2+a^2}\right)}{x^2+b^2}$

Tom D.Show that $$\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{\log\left(\sqrt{x^2+a^2}\right)}{x^2+b^2}\,dx = \frac{\pi}{b}\log\left(a+b\right)$$ for $a,b>0\in\mathbb{R}$. I stumbled on this answer empirically, but I'm not sure how to solve it directly.

 
Perhaps you should do functional powers.
 
@BrevanEllefsen LMAO
@S.C.B. Nah, I found my method is way better
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt lol, I told you the other day determining the size of huge numbers would be tough XD
This chat is exploding right now
too bad I can't talk
but I'll enjoy reading it later XD
 
Really, could I change your code a bit on my own?
I'm not going to enter it into the event, since that would be cheating, but I think I can get it larger than that.
 
1:53 AM
@BrevanEllefsen Determining the size? Yeah, that's tough, and we'll all enjoy looking at it. But comparing two numbers? Sure, easier times Graham's number
@S.C.B. sure
 
Where is the code?
 
2:13 AM
@Ramanujan
http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2138770/could-someone-tell-me-how-large-this-number-is
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt "nice question !"
a↑3 mean $a^3$ ?
 
One arrow, then yes
$a\uparrow^{1}b=a^b$
 
2 arrows then?
 
@AhmedS.Attaalla
http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2138770/could-someone-tell-me-how-large-this-number-is
@Ramanujan $a\uparrow^{2}b=a\uparrow^{1}a\uparrow^{1}a\uparrow^{1}...$
$b$ amount of $a$'s
@Ramanujan Also, it is right to left operation
 
Simply can you recommend me any material to start studying, I don't have a math class, and I'm bored.
 
2:20 AM
I got b=0 ^ what do you think ?
 
$3\uparrow^{2}3=3\uparrow^{1}3\uparrow^{1}3=3\uparrow^{1}27\approx7625597500$
@AhmedS.Attaalla Real or complex analysis?
If you just want something for fun, try coding a large number
Kinda time consuming, fun, always more to do
@Ramanujan b=0
 
Yippie
 
:D
@AhmedS.Attaalla Complex analysis is easy btw
but nice to apply to the random hard integral
 
Where can I start learning some of that?
Btw, to be honest. I have no idea what coding is.
 
2:25 AM
@AhmedS.Attaalla Took S.C.B. this week to learn enough to code 'large' numbers
It's pretty easy
@AhmedS.Attaalla Idk how to learn math subjects correctly, so don't count on my math skills
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt
$$\int\limits_0^\infty {\frac{{{x^1}}}{{1 + {x^3}}}dx = } \frac{\pi }{3}\frac{1}{{\sin \frac{\pi }{3}}} = \frac{{2\pi }}{{3\sqrt 3 }}$$
How^ ?
 
@Ramanujan Many ways of proving that
21
A: Closed form for $\int_0^\infty {\frac{{{x^n}}}{{1 + {x^m}}}dx }$

Robert IsraelThe general formula (for $m > n+1$ and $n \ge 0$) is $\frac{\pi}{m} \csc\left(\frac{\pi (n+1)}{m}\right)$. IIRC the usual method involves a wedge-shaped contour of angle $2 \pi/m$. EDIT: Consider $\oint_\Gamma f(z)\ dz$ where $f(z) = \frac{z^n}{1+z^m}$ (using the principal branch if $m$ or $n$ ...

 
Tell me in common way of approaching it
 
Um
I think its over your head, no offense
 
Integration by parts will work?
 
2:33 AM
I think one elementry way to do it is to factor $x^3+1^3$ using sums of cubes then use partial fractions.
 
Ah yes, that might work
IBP likely won't work
but factoring might
(painful factoring)
Well, it is now time for me to go to bed, so I'll have to go
Good night!
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt good night
 
 
2 hours later…
4:28 AM
Hmmm
pretty tough integral to prove by elementary means
I attacked it for a while with as many basic tools as I could
Managed to get it to $$PV\int_{0}^\infty\frac{2}{1 - x^3}dx$$
Which wouldn't be hard to attack with residues
 
@BrevanEllefsen you should expand on that
 
? what do you mean
 
it's not clear how to use residues on that
plus
that isn't even very well defined
since you have a gaping pole in the interval you are integrating over
 
eh
fair point
ok.
Statement retracted
 
 
2 hours later…
6:17 AM
@SimplyBeautifulArt What if Python throws a "maximum recursion depth" runtime error?
Do we assume such errors don't occur or must we avoid it?
 
Ignore it I presume
since the number of calls will be at least on the order of $G$
which will overflow Python no matter how you do it
 
What's G?
It's possible to write a program that computes large numbers without overflowing the recursion depth.
It will overflow the heap, but not necessarily the stack.
So I ignore it ah?
 
Graham's Number
which is astronomically huge
As such
if we were to ban overflows every answer would be invalidated.
Well, every competing example
SimplyArt's example would easily overflow
 
6:32 AM
You didn't get my point.
Stack != Heap.
Unlimited memory != Unlimited recursion depth.
I can still compute very large numbers with limited recursion depth, assuming unlimited memory for arbitrary precision arithmetic.
 
No, I don't think you get my point
the examples thus far
have a recursion depth greater than G
which is far greater than anything Python is going to allow if it has a finite recursion depth
so I think it's safe to ignore recursion depth
 
Ok I get your point; accept because it would otherwise invalidate existing entries.
Sure.
Makes the largest possible number far larger of course.
But shouldn't we not allow looking at other entries? I didn't look at them anyway.
 
6:48 AM
A few have been posted by the authors
@user21820 SimplyArt has publically posted two himself already
 
@BrevanEllefsen: I know. But I presume that if I look at previous entries, I would either be able to improve them or incorporate ideas into my own. Thought it would be fairer to not look.
 
Fair enough. I probably won't participate myself, so I'll just read them and referee for you :)
 
Haha I think it wouldn't be very easy to distinguish the larger entries, even though for sure they would differ by incredible ratios.
 
 
5 hours later…
12:15 PM
@user21820 You may only use the Knuth's up-arrow portion of my code btw

The big number (256) contest

13 hours ago, 6 minutes total – 5 messages, 1 user, 1 star

Bookmarked 13 hours ago by Simply Beautiful Art

@Fawad
 
Good morning @SimplyBeautifulArt
 
Good morning
Are you spectatong, chatting, or checking out the competition, if you don't mind my asking.
 
In case you forgot me iam Ramanujan
 
Oh
XD ok
Lol, fun question. Probably going to take a while to get answered
 
9
Q: Could someone tell me how large this number is?

Simply Beautiful ArtContext: If you guys didn't know, I'm running a nice little contest to see who can program the largest number. More specific rules if you are interested may be found in my chat room (click here to join). If you are entering, do note that I am accepting entries for quite a while (ignore all the ...

This^ ?
 
12:21 PM
Yup
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt Thanks, but I can code it myself. I have a great idea already, which so far uses only 179 non-whitespace characters.. I'm wondering how best to use the rest.
 
Yeah
@user21820 what language are you using?
 
I wonder if Math SE allows posting of such little contests as actual questions. If not, what about code-golf SE? (Though not many people there are likely to have the expertise or interest in comparing gigantic numbers.)
Python 3.
And I pity the one who has to analyze my submission-to-be.
@Fawad Like you, I have little experience standing among giants.
@Fawad: Sorry didn't intend to ping you. =P
 
@user21820 I will not get angry
 
Lol, I will be reading submissions
 
12:29 PM
@SimplyBeautifulArt: Reading, yes. But comprehending? =D =D =D
 
@user21820 yes he will. He'll come at you like a thunder storm
=D
 
12:57 PM
@S.C.B. Did you ever change my code?
I too modified the code a bit
@user21820 :-(
I can't even see how big f(2,0,0,0,0) is
oh
OH
...
Now I see why
D:
 
1:37 PM
@SimplyBeautifulArt I only had about 10 minutes, so I couldn't actually.
 
The word limit of 256 stopped me as well.
 
no problem
XD
I really pushed that limit lol
@LeeMosher

The big number (256) contest

15 hours ago, 6 minutes total – 5 messages, 1 user, 1 star

Bookmarked 14 hours ago by Simply Beautiful Art

O.O
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt: You didn't see that before?
 
...
Don't judge
 
1:45 PM
Not judging; I thought you got the idea for your contest from there.
 
:|
No that specific page
that's the page of all the crazy functions
didn't see that before
 
Ah haha.. well most of them can't be implemented in 256 characters anyway.
 
I honestly can't even understand most of them
 
Heh my idea is related to one of them, but I've no idea how fast it really grows.
 
:P
I honestly want to put my number on that line
 
1:51 PM
I don't know where to put mine.. I only have a lower bound.. =P
 
@celtschk Hehe
I used all 256 characters
@user21820 same
 
repl.it/FaRZ/4 is probably equal to $4 \rightarrow 4 \rightarrow 4 \rightarrow 4$, but I don't know well enough to be sure.
 
@S.C.B. I came up with a neat way to save characters and make your number larger
Just remove all the "a==0" and replace them with "a<0"
less characters, slightly bigger numbers
 
Okay, what does $a<0$ indicate?
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt Nice trick; I found that too.
 
1:54 PM
@S.C.B. Instead of "test to see if a=0" you use "test to see if a<0"
 
But I'm aiming to win without squeezing all the space. =)
 
which allows your function one extra step to use and one extra character to spare
Lol, we're probably taking this way to seriously
but I can't not take it seriously
 
So I could exponentiate this function further with functional powers to probably get $9 \rightarrow9 \rightarrow 9\rightarrow 9 \rightarrow 9 \rightarrow 9 $. Within the remaining 100 or so characters.
 
lol, the LateX on this one was hard.
0
A: How to factor out this expression

S.C.B.Using synthetic division, we have that . $$\begin{array}{c|rrr} & 2 & 0 & -19 & 3\\ {\color{red}3} & \downarrow & 6 & 18 & -3\\ \hline & 2 & 6 & -1 & |\phantom{-} {\color{blue}0} \end{array}$$ Thus, $$2x^3-19x+3=(x-3)(2x^2+6x-1)$$

 
2:03 PM
Lol
 
Is that how you write synthetic division in America?
 
Oh
appears so
And it appears I was taught wrongly about where the 3 goes
 
@SimplyBeautifulArt Thank you for your attention.
 
LaTeX is really nice.
 
2:06 PM
Why everyone there post such horrible answers?!
 
Why?
What makes you think so?
 
I mean
you don't have to explain division like that
 
Maybe they thought they need to do it.
 
I suppose
In algebra, synthetic division is a method of performing Euclidean division of polynomials, with less writing and fewer calculations than occur with polynomial long division. It is mostly taught for division by binomials of the form x − a , {\displaystyle x-a,\ } but the method generalizes to division by any monic polynomial, and to any polynomial. The advantages of synthetic division are that it allows one to calculate without writing variables, it uses few calculations, and it takes significantly less space on paper...
@S.C.B. Add this to your answer I would recommend.
 
I think I added it.
 
2:09 PM
oh
nvm then
 
What is nvm?
I think it's probably never mind.
 
yeah
nvm = never mind
 
2:31 PM
I found an interesting set of problems called Killer Problems.
They were made to stop Jews from enrolling in schools under Soviet Russia.
 
I shall return. Gimme some time. Leaving.
 
bye
@MartinArgerami Sorry, here are the rules of the contest btw

The big number (256) contest

16 hours ago, 6 minutes total – 5 messages, 1 user, 1 star

Bookmarked 15 hours ago by Simply Beautiful Art

 
00:00 - 15:0015:00 - 00:00

« first day (35 days earlier)      last day (1463 days later) »