User blog comment:QNw/Subject Googology/@comment-27260252-20170702192341

First off, welcome QNw to the googological community.

Great job. Your numbers were very large on the googological scale(except Windows XG, just on the googological scale but still large and meaningful to the age of Windows😅). If you want some advice on how to learn here, please read the paragraphs below, but you don't have to. If you really just want to learn as you go along, just do so at your choice and get clarifications and concepts by asking questions with blog posts, this community is very active. Note that they are long and that functions and ideas often have very confusing definitions that are complicated and/or unnecessarily complicated.

I am going to give you 2 of the most fundamental things every googologist needs to understand.

First, the main thing a googologist needs to understand is that making a new number out of preexisting concepts does not make it your idea. I mean you could logically argue that the definition was your idea, however it still wouldn't be considered your idean because all you are doing is using a bunch of other completely different ideas that people worked to develop and taking the whole(made from those preexisting ideas) idea as your own, when really it is just a result of other's ideas. Otherwise, we would have a new world googological champion every second. Analogies below:

Someone could make the world's largest number from their own idea, but they wouldn't get any credit because people would say "I DEFINE BIGGER CHAMPION AS THAT NUMBER PENTATED TO 900 QUADRILLION PENTATED TO BIG FOOT TO THE POWER OF SASQUATCH TO THE POWER OF 800 QUADRILLION BILLION BILLION TO THE POWER OF 80 BILLION ALL WITH RAYO'S NUMBER UP ARROWS TETRATED TO 99999999999999999999 BIG FOOT^(FOOT^9999999999(10^SASQUATCH))". Then it would be beaten one second later by "EVEN BIGGER CHAMPION, BIGGER CHAMPION BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAHITYBLAHBLAHBLAH." And so on.

Even seeing the size and numbers involved in this paragraph, you get what would happen, these are what we call Salad Numbers and they don't get credit for only using other's ideas, as described above. Also, (input function here)^x is that function recursed x times.

Second thing: Even if you make salad numbers like the above, it still amounts to a very little amount of the true potential involved in the functions used to define the numbers. For example, even if you did Rayo's #(Which is Rayo(10^100)) with 999 uparrows to Rayo's #, it could still easily be beaten by Rayo(10^100+1). Even if you made a mess of Rayo(10^100), it would have to be a massive googological sized mess in order to exceed Rayo(10^100+1).