User blog:ArtismScrub/Another classic attempt at redefining Oblivion that will inevitably fail but whatever

(see Oblivion and Utter Oblivion if you can't follow what I'm talking about.)

Thesis or something
Utter Oblivion has been celebrated as the largest "number" defined by Jonathan Bowers (even though the largest one with an agreed-upon definition is goppatothplex ). It diagonalizes over the concept of a mathematical system itself, defining a K(n) system as "complete and well-defined system of mathematics that can be described with no more than n symbols".

However, that doesn't work. At all.

There is no way to define how many symbols it takes to describe a given system--what language would it be written in? And Utter Oblivion is even worse--a system designed to create lesser systems? That could theoretically be used to create systems that themselves create systems, and turn into an infinite loop.

In a nutshell, Oblivion and Utter Oblivion are not really defined so much as described.

However, they can be described less blatantly if some parameters are set first.

"Definition"
Firstly, we redefine the K(n) systems, as that is the basis of Oblivion itself.

Define a κ(n) system as a computer program used to generate numbers using symbols or functions defined in the program, using no more than n bits of code.

This is much better defined than the K(n) system, because unlike the vague concept of a " complete and well-defined system of mathematics", the concept of binary code is nothing new and leads to a finite number of possible, definable results.

Something like JavaScript Hypercalc is an example of a  κ(n) system, however, it cannot output numbers larger than 10 ↑↑16256, so it's not even close to what we're looking for.

Define "Formal Oblivion" as the largest finite number that can be generated using no more than an admiral  symbols/functions in any  κ(hyperal ) system.

Utter garbage
And, of course, the next step is to define an Utter version, somehow.

Define a  κm(n) system as an engine or coding language that can define  κm-1 systems of arbitrary size, using no more than n bits of code, and a  κ1 system as a  κ(n) system.

Then, of course, define "Formal Utter Oblivion" as the largest finite number that can be generated using no more than a Formal Oblivion symbols in a  κ system created from a  κ2 system created from a  κ3 system created from a ... created from a  κFormal Oblivion(Formal Oblivion) system.

Conclusion
I probably still screwed up the definition bad.

Moral of the story: Don't try to define a game breaker. It doesn't work.