Great read.  Thanks for sharing this essay.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:09 PM, John Baker <[email protected]> wrote:

> Here's the link to Aronson's essay
>
> http://www.scottaaronson.com/writings/bignumbers.html
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 18, 2015, at 12:20 PM, "R.E. Boss" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Link?
> >
> > Notice that Conway (who else?) in The Book of Numbers wrote a
> generalization
> > of Knuth's up-notation (actually the Ackermann notation), his chained
> arrow
> > notation.
> >
> >
> > R.E. Boss
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [email protected] [mailto:programming-
> >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of John Baker
> >> Sent: woensdag 18 februari 2015 16:15
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Fwd: Hello all!
> >>
> >> Very slick. I was just reading Scott Aronson's fine blog post about the
> > Busy
> >> Beaver problem and he commented on Knuth's up up notation. If anyone's
> >> interested in very large numbers Aronson's post is a superb overview.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>>> On Feb 17, 2015, at 3:05 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This a way to produce numbers using the Knuth up arrow notation in J:
> >>>
> >>>  Knuth=. &* NB. (adv)
> >>>  up=. &1    NB. (adv)
> >>>
> >>>  2x  Knuth up up    4 5
> >>> 65536
> >> 2003529930406846464979072351560255750447825475569751419265016973710
> >> 8940595563114530895061308809333481010382343429072631818229493821188
> >> 1266886950636476154702916504187191635158796634721944293092798208430
> >> 9104855990570159318959639524863372367203002916969...
> >>>
> >>>  # @: ": 2x Knuth up up 5
> >>> 19729
> >>>
> >>>  6x Knuth up up 3
> >> 2659119772153226779682489404387918594905342200269924300660432789497
> >> 0735598738829091213422929061755830324406828265067234256016357755902
> >> 7938964261261109302039893034777446061389442537960087466214788422902
> >> 2133853819192905427915750759274952935109319020362271989...
> >>>  #@: ": 6x Knuth up up 3
> >>> 36306
> >>>
> >>>  3x Knuth up up up 0 1 2
> >>> 1 3 7625597484987
> >>>
> >>> 2x Knuth up up 6  NB. It is toooooooooooo big!
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Fausto Saporito
> >> <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>> yes the number is very big, but why if I don't use the extended
> >>>> precision I have "infinity" as result, and if I use it I got an error
> >>>> ?
> >>>>
> >>>> I should get infinity anyways.
> >>>>
> >>>> this is my J session:
> >>>>
> >>>> ^/ 2 2 2 2
> >>>>
> >>>> 65536
> >>>>
> >>>> ^/ 2 2 2 2 2      NB. do not use extended precision and I have "+inf"
> >>>>
> >>>> _
> >>>>
> >>>> ^/ 2 2 2 2 2 2   NB. do not use extended precision and I have "+inf"
> >>>>
> >>>> _
> >>>>
> >>>> ^/ x: 2 2 2 2 2   NB. using extended precision I have the result (part
> > of
> >>>> it)
> >> 2003529930406846464979072351560255750447825475569751419265016973710
> >> 8940595563114530895061308809333481010382343429072631818229493821188
> >> 1266886950636476154702916504187191635158796634721944293092798208430
> >> 9104855990570159318959639524863372367203002916969592156...
> >>>>
> >>>> ^/ x: 2 2 2 2 2 2 NB. using extended precision I have error... not
> > "+inf"
> >>>>
> >>>> |limit error
> >>>>
> >>>> | ^/x:2 2 2 2 2 2
> >>>>
> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth%27s_up-arrow_notation
> >>>>
> >>>> thanks,
> >>>> Fausto
> >>>>
> >>>> 2015-02-17 18:55 GMT+01:00 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
> >>>> <[email protected]>:
> >>>>> 2 ^. ^/ 5 # 2x
> >>>>> 65536
> >>>>>
> >>>>> so at just 5, it is a 65k bit number
> >>>>>
> >>>>> at 6, the 2log of that number would be that 65kbit number.  The
> number
> >>>> of atoms in the universe is an 80 bit number.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> From: Raul Miller <[email protected]>
> >>>>> To: Programming forum <[email protected]>
> >>>>> Cc:
> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 12:32 PM
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Fwd: Hello all!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I would guess that the number you are generating is too big to be
> >>>>> represented using J's data structures (which would also suggest that
> >>>>> it would be too big to fit into memory).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Raul
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Fausto Saporito
> >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>> HI!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm a new J user with a little experience of APL and LISP.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In these days I'm playing with big numbers... very big indeed, and I
> >>>>>> found a bug (?) in the exteded precision implementation of J.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm not sure if I can call it a bug, but if I use the standard
> >>>>>> precision number I got a "infinity" as result... as should be.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm talking about knuth-up-arrow notation, to build the "tower of
> >>>>>> power". In J the syntax is amazingly simple : ^/ 2 2 2 2
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2^^4 is 2 * (2* (2* 2)) = 65536
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Now 2^^5 is _ with standard precision... but if I use x:  (i.e. ^/
> x:
> >>>>>> 2 2 2 2 2) can get most of number... it's quite big indeed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The problem arises with 2^^6 or 3^^4 I get "limit error" instead of
> _
> >>>> ... why ?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Is it an expected behaviour ?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> thanks in advance,
> >>>>>> Fausto
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> For information about J forums see
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> For information about J forums see
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> For information about J forums see
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> For information about J forums see
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> For information about J forums see
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to