User blog comment:Vel!/Re: Rayo's function/@comment-25593348-20141121014944

You're right and you're wrong. Let me explain:

The discernable difference between the iota function and my number, other than one being a number while the other being a function, is the concept of having every physical answer. It is, in a sense, a more determinable number as opposed to a function, and the function only uses addition. So, at the end of the day, it is a discernable number, and the technical function of it is this, in temporal notation.

Replace m in the iota function with ⌘, and then search for a number between the first mathematical equation ever conceived by a person, which made sense. Then, take any equation up to the present, (think of an equation,) and, just like the iota function, place all equations, used logically and answerable up from the first equation to your equation. Technically, using time travel unfortunately breaks this rule. The smallest positive whole integer larger than the previously discerned matrix of equations summated is my number. Iota function, but more discernable answer.

Then there is the technicalities. But I'll let you work out anymore BS you might want to put in.

At the end of the day, people can consider this the largest possible function numerically, because all other functions up to self-stated point is not as large, since the point i am making is larger, but no recursives.

That is all I will say for now, but logically speaking, it is the equivalent of a real positive number based off of a thought experiment, put in through a function... in order to reach a real answer. So my number uses a technical "invisible" variable in order to maintain a single answer.