User blog comment:Ubersketch/Submit a paper/@comment-35470197-20190515010608/@comment-30869823-20190517202245

@P進大好きbot

Could you please link me to one of the more accesible googolical papers?

> Of course. I meant that there are few googologists who can write a proof which is sufficiently formal, i.e. is considered to be published in a valid journal. "Proofs" in this wiki usually contain serious mistakes.

From what I've read in your posts and your profile description I guess you have sufficient knowledge to write such a paper but I don't know if you want to put your time in this. Would you be intersested in helping someone else write one?

@Ubersketch

> I'm talking about googology that hasn't entered any journals obviously. Most googology concepts made by professionals didn't have large numbers in mind.

There is no point to talking about the lack of googological papers and than discounting all the publisched ones... (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman) (I don't see how it having been made with large numbers in mind makes any difference)