User blog:Acamaeda/A new largest number, maybe?

This is (kind of) an attempt to use the ideas behind Jonathan Bowers's "Oblivion" and "Utter Oblivion" to make numbers that are actually well-defined. It takes the idea that all other numbers and means of producing those numbers are defined in a (relatively) small amount of information and tries to systemize that. "Oblivion is defined as "the largest number defined using no more than a kungulus symbols in some K(gongulus) system", where a "K(n) system" is a "complete and well-defined system of mathematics that can be described with no more than n symbols"

The main issues that I can see with this are that how the system is being described, and what is interpreting that description are undefined  (defining the system that it's described in as another system that is defined in a certain number of characters doesn't help) ; and that a "symbol" could theoretically hold any amount of data in it.

The way to fix this is by defining what interprets the information as a computer (because in theory, an advanced enough computer can do anything a human can and more), and by changing "symbols" to "bytes".

Zoosmell is defined as the largest specific number which can have its description stored and interpreted in a computer with 2^1024 bytes of memory. That memory can be in any configuration, whatever configuration lets it get the bigest number. A large portion of the memory might be the information defining the number, with the rest being the operating system and the program that interprets that information. (Not necessarily though.)

"Interpreting" the number means that the computer must have a sufficient understanding of the number to be able to compare it to other, similarly large and complicated numbers (which might take another 2^1024 bytes of memory to store and interpret). This serves as an analogue for a human "interpreting" the definitions of other Googological numbers.

To prevent infinite recursion, the definition within the computer can't use the same method as this, unless the computer in that definition has fewer bytes of memory than this one. It also can't use a similar definiton involving similar computer-like machines with additional capabilities, such as quantum computers.

And that is where we take it a step further. Qsmell is defined as the largest specific number that can have its description stored and interpreted by a quantum computer with Zosmell bytes of memory, in any split of bits and qbits. I'm not sure if this would only be trivially larger than Zoosmell or not, or if the nature of quantum computers allows it to be well-defined, but it's worth a shot.

Once again, I'm not sure if this is in fact Googologically valid or if it has any big holes in it, or if I didn't explain something well, so I'm looking for feedback!

Acamaeda (talk) 21:10, September 29, 2017 (UTC)