Track the most recent social changes to the community on this page.
Filters
18 January 2021
-
19:13RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Just an idea...: (view)
-
19:12RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): Orange pasta and a strawberry (view)
-
16:15Noogai93 (talk | contribs) commented on the article DrCeasium/Named hyperfactorial numbers: Can you make Amosa-, Hapra-, Kyra-, Pija-, Sagana-, Pectra-, Nisaba-, Zotza-, Alpha-, Beta-, Gamma-,... (view)
-
14:20RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The first thing is just NOCF? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/OCFFCOOCFFCO: Gmjbvmhng (view)
-
13:46RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > What the Mahlo cardinal does to the Inaccessible Cardinal Is this the "cardinals that are stationa... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/A thinge: Yes. (view)
-
02:30P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The first thing is just NOCF? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/OCFFCOOCFFCO: False. (view)
-
02:14C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The first thing is just NOCF? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/OCFFCOOCFFCO: I was under the impression that Nothing OCF and Weak Buchholz's Function were different names for th... (view)
-
02:11C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/A thinge: > What the Mahlo cardinal does to the Inaccessible Cardinal Is this the "cardinals that are stationa... (view)
-
00:58P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The first thing is just NOCF? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/OCFFCOOCFFCO: If you are talking about Nothing OCF by CatIsFluffy or rpakr, then it is different. (One because the... (view)
17 January 2021
-
22:36RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The first thing is just NOCF? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/OCFFCOOCFFCO: IguessguessIIguessIguessguessIIguess GuessIIguessguessI (view)
-
20:24RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How about defining f_0(n) = TREE(n), then define f_k(n) = TREE^n(n), a TREE hierarchy? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Tree Array Notation: , . , , (view)
-
18:20PowerFlameX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): Wtf (view)
-
16:35PowerFlameX (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/OCFFCOOCFFCO: The first thing is just NOCF? (view)
-
04:48C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Can you please stop spamming unrelated nonsensical content? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/THE DENTIST LICKS YOUR TEETH CLEAN: When the dentist licks your teeth clean (view)
-
03:34
-
03:04
-
03:03
-
03:03
-
03:02
-
02:56P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Trakaplex/New Notation For Schmittyillion Plus Tier Myrillion Illions: ... (view)
-
00:51RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): (view)
-
00:41
-
00:26Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): UNOCF DOES NOT EXIST! I WIN! (view)
-
00:25RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I think that (if formalized, IDK Saibian's original intentions) E100{#&#&#...#&#&#}100 with a copies... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Just an idea...: __-_--_- (view)
-
00:19RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I think that (if formalized, IDK Saibian's original intentions) E100{#&#&#...#&#&#}100 with a copies... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Just an idea...: (view)
-
00:14RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): WHEN THE DENTIST LICKS YOUR TEETH CLEAN‼‼‼‼‼‼‼ (view)
16 January 2021
-
23:41PowerFlameX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): I mean you're not better, with your stupid weird fake UNOCF copy that doesn't even go to IFP smh (view)
-
23:40PowerFlameX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): I did it on purpose. I could try to make a formalized OCF (view)
-
23:20RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): The title literally says it's badbadbad (view)
-
23:18DaveRainbowin (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Bad on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): Bad because theres not even set theory smh (view)
-
23:17DaveRainbowin (talk | contribs) commented on the article PowerFlameX/My attempt at making a UNOCF-style OCF (very bad and ill-defined): Bad (view)
-
23:05RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I think that (if formalized, IDK Saibian's original intentions) E100{#&#&#...#&#&#}100 with a copies... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Just an idea...: This is just my idea. (view)
-
21:04C7X (talk | contribs) edited a comment on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Just an idea...: I think that (if formalized, IDK Saibian's original intentions) E100{#&#&#...#&#&#}100 with a copies... (view)
-
21:04C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Just an idea...: I think that (if formalized, IDK Saibian's original intentions) E100{#&#&#...#&#&#}100 with a copies... (view)
-
19:37Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Should I delete it now? on the article Tetramur/To moderators - 1: Oh, sorry. Nevermind. Thank you for the job. (view)
-
19:34Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Should I delete it now? on the article Tetramur/To moderators - 1: By the way, you deleted wrong blog post. (view)
-
19:34Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Should I delete it now? on the article Tetramur/To moderators - 1: Yes. (view)
-
19:31C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tetramur/To moderators - 1: Should I delete it now? (view)
-
19:28Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > I am not asking how strong it is. Exactly. But note that I don't think that ternary Veblen's funct... (view)
-
16:00RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: I'm not sure I maybe just maybe will try to figure this out idk. (view)
-
09:17P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: By the way, Nirvana Supermind started stating that you are vandalising, but I highly doubt it. (Perh... (view)
-
09:00P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: In my opinion, section 9.1 is ok because "an ordinal in FGH (which is not necessarily PTO of some th... (view)
-
07:46C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: Also I recommend changing the title of section 9.1 to "Does PTO(T) in FGH make sense without fundame... (view)
-
04:03P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: OK. Could you check "Explanation" section? (Also, you saw that there are many comments in the talk p... (view)
-
03:37Trakaplex (talk | contribs) edited a reply to the comment Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: The first one. I never knew displaying this number would result in a stroke. Let me explain it a lit... (view)
-
03:37Trakaplex (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: The first one. I never knew displaying this number would result in a stroke. Let me explain it a lit... (view)
-
00:11P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: When you were only interested in |= for finitely many explicit formulae, then Kunen would be suffici... (view)
15 January 2021
-
23:56RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: DjklDHK.JHKksldlkjkj (view)
-
23:56RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Small numbers (sort of) on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: Daghkdhkjhj (view)
-
23:56RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Small numbers (sort of) on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: Adiyuihfdlaihb (view)
-
23:56RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: Small numbers (sort of) (view)
-
23:56RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: Vjgkuhbhblk (view)
-
23:52P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Trakaplex/Emphasizing Schmittyillion: Please explain such a thing next time at the talk page because contributors do not have to check you... (view)
-
19:00C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: Sorry, I shouldn't be using concepts whose precise definition I don't know. Do you have a link to th... (view)
-
17:27Trakaplex (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/THE DENTIST LICKS YOUR TEETH CLEAN: Can you please stop spamming unrelated nonsensical content? (view)
-
16:49RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Uh, I am afraid that you have never checked summary boxes or talk pages when deletion tags are put..... on the article Trakaplex/Okay... Umm: Dgiasyidfagsbhgsyhdlkjdkjbzukgii8rgfrlguagoa8ggalfg;g;aga;ugrga;agr[g[ag0agoho (view)
-
14:23RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Uh, I am afraid that you have never checked summary boxes or talk pages when deletion tags are put..... on the article Trakaplex/Okay... Umm: Bhkghbgh (view)
-
03:00P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: > In terms of functional shrewdness, I suppose it could be the same as the structure used by indescr... (view)
-
02:11C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: In terms of functional shrewdness, I suppose it could be the same as the structure used by indescrib... (view)
14 January 2021
-
23:30P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: > What happens if I define the structures in the way used in the definition of indescribable cardina... (view)
-
15:37C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: From now I will change all definitions to use "functional shrewdness" instead (also my original defi... (view)
-
14:59C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: What happens if I define the structures in the way used in the definition of indescribable cardinals... (view)
-
14:44P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: Since you are using a language before you fix A⊂α, you cannot define (∈,A) as a pair of ∈ and... (view)
-
14:28C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: A is a subset of α, so it's a unary predicate on α. I might change the language again (view)
-
07:56P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: > (the section in the link defines indescribability, then weakly-indescribability later) I see. But ... (view)
-
07:32C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: Also I will change the language used in Ord-shrewdness to {∈,A} (view)
-
07:28C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: V is not used in the definition of weak indescribability (the section in the link defines indescriba... (view)
-
07:06P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: It depends on the meaning of "first-order unary formula" in the context of hyp cos. It is quite ambi... (view)
-
05:28C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: In that case, is weakly-indescribability well-defined? (view)
-
05:25C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: Update: I realized now, because (f(α),∈) isn't amenable. In fact I think I might either change it... (view)
-
05:17P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: So is "(f(α),∈)|=φ(A)" actually intended? But it requires P(α)⊂f(α), which does not hold unl... (view)
-
05:08C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: > In that case, I assume the consistency of the axiom. (If it is inconsistent, the well-definedness ... (view)
-
04:50P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: > The axiom is my own, along with my own definition of Ord-shrewdness. In that case, I assume the co... (view)
-
04:27C7X (talk | contribs) edited a reply to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: The axiom is my own, along with my own definition of Ord-shrewdness. Thanks for pointing out the typ... (view)
-
04:25C7X (talk | contribs) edited a reply to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: The axiom is my own, along with my own definition of Ord-shrewdness. Thanks for pointing out the typ... (view)
-
04:24C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: The axiom is my own, along with my own definition of Ord-shrewdness. Thanks for pointing out the typ... (view)
-
03:40P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Uh, I am afraid that you have never checked summary boxes or talk pages when deletion tags are put..... on the article Trakaplex/Okay... Umm: In that case, please clarify in the article that Anonymous in the original source is actually you, a... (view)
-
03:26Trakaplex (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Uh, I am afraid that you have never checked summary boxes or talk pages when deletion tags are put..... on the article Trakaplex/Okay... Umm: The page said "anonymous user" but that was actually me, either I couldn't log in to the site or did... (view)
-
03:02P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Trakaplex/Okay... Umm: Uh, I am afraid that you have never checked summary boxes or talk pages when deletion tags are put..... (view)
-
03:00P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: In addition, there are possible typos: Ord - 0 should be Ord - {0}, as Ord - 0 is Ord. (γ^+)-OrdShr... (view)
-
02:53P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: The definition of an f-Ord-Shrewd ordinal on s is not appropriately displayed, because it seems to b... (view)
-
00:02C7X (talk | contribs) edited a comment on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Some random OCF thingy: Are you sure the line about A´(Ω_2) is correct? Edit: It could be a lot smaller, because it's only... (view)
-
00:00C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Some random OCF thingy: Are you sure the line about A´(Ω_2) is correct? (view)
13 January 2021
-
23:56RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment :rhettcringe: ugh what the heck even IS this post on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Whatdoicallthis: Idk ... ... ... .....................idk (view)
-
23:30C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I think that it's probably stronger to use a system that sets the recursive analogue of subtle cardi... on the article Scorcher007/Hierarchy of ordinals Z 2. Help me to understand: Also #35 depends on the collection schema that you're using, and #37, #39 are likely incorrect (sour... (view)
-
23:09C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Scorcher007/Hierarchy of ordinals Z 2. Help me to understand: I think that it's probably stronger to use a system that sets the recursive analogue of subtle cardi... (view)
-
23:07C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment There doesn't exist an α that's α-indescribable, but you can have things like the supre... on the article Scorcher007/Hierarchy of ordinals Z 2. Help me to understand: I have proven that there are no ω-ply-stb. ordinals below the least nonprojectible ordinal (here), ... (view)
-
22:25XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Whatdoicallthis: :rhettcringe: ugh what the heck even IS this post (view)
-
20:08C7X (talk | contribs) edited a reply to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: I haven't proven any results about its overall strength, but I expect it to be very strong if it wor... (view)
-
20:07C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: I haven't proven aby results about its overall strength, but I expect it to be very strong if it wor... (view)
-
20:04C7X (talk | contribs) edited a comment on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... (view)
-
20:04C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Googological Open Problems on OCFs: Is this OCF well-defined? (Only the OCF in the linked section; some OCFs in other sections of this p... (view)
-
19:27
12 January 2021
-
23:18RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How to write ϑ(Ω^Ω)? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Whatdoicallthis: Okay fixed (view)
-
23:09C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Whatdoicallthis: How to write ϑ(Ω^Ω)? (view)
-
21:37RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Beautiful 😂 on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/ummm: HAHAHA lol (view)
-
21:35RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article C7X/OCFs/Ordinal notations: Nice! (view)
-
21:35RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article VoidSansXD/i have coined exactly 420 googolisms: "funny weed number laugh rn," (view)
-
21:33RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article Noogai93/Pijillion: Interesting... (view)
-
21:24RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/ϴ: Thanks for fixing the symbols now I know what to do. (view)
-
21:22RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Ω^Ω's case seems to use Φ(2,0) using Rathjen's Φ function (informally, Φ(2,0) is the first card... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/ϴ: Yes. (view)
-
19:29C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment What does ε0 use? on the article A Hippopotatomus/Minimalist ordinal notation: The limit is ε_0 (it isn't able to express ε_0) (view)
-
17:28C7X (talk | contribs) edited a comment on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/ϴ: Ω^Ω's case seems to use Φ(2,0) using Rathjen's Φ function (informally, Φ(2,0) is the first card... (view)
-
17:28C7X (talk | contribs) edited a comment on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/ϴ: Ω^Ω's case seems to use Φ(2,0) using Rathjen's Φ function (informally, Φ(2,0) is the first card... (view)
-
17:26C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/ϴ: Ω^Ω's case seems to use Φ(2,0) (view)
-
17:05RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article A Hippopotatomus/Minimalist ordinal notation: What does ε0 use? (view)
-
16:48RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment ς function appears similar to Veblen function on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: Yes. (view)
-
15:03C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: ς function appears similar to Veblen function (view)
-
12:52
-
02:20P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How about Taranovsky's C? on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: I am not expecting it. Rathjen's Ξ is quite strong. If I need to beat it, I will use my strongest c... (view)
-
02:06C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How about Taranovsky's C? on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: Do you expect this has a higher order type than Rathjen's ordinal notation based on K? (view)
-
02:05P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Such a great work! and I'm so glad that my 3-ary psi did some job. BTW, I found mistakes in "vs Rath... on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: Thank you. I fixed them. (view)
11 January 2021
-
18:42C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this similar to this? on the article Youhuali/Fastest Way to Beat Kirby-Paris hydra: > Is "e33808" mean 10^{33808}? I guess so (view)
-
18:02Youhuali (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this similar to this? on the article Youhuali/Fastest Way to Beat Kirby-Paris hydra: Yes, should be the same. I didn't know that. Is "e33808" mean 10^{33808}? Good estimation, though th... (view)
-
17:47C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Youhuali/Fastest Way to Beat Kirby-Paris hydra: Is this similar to this? (view)
-
17:08Kanrokoti (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: Such a great work! and I'm so glad that my 3-ary psi did some job. BTW, I found mistakes in "vs Rath... (view)
-
01:33P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Minimalists use only one symbol. For example: 0 | 1 ||| 2 ||||| 3 ||||||| ω || ω+1 |||||| ω+2 |||... on the article A Hippopotatomus/Minimalist ordinal notation: Anyway, I use emacs. (view)
-
01:26C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Minimalists use only one symbol. For example: 0 | 1 ||| 2 ||||| 3 ||||||| ω || ω+1 |||||| ω+2 |||... on the article A Hippopotatomus/Minimalist ordinal notation: Real mathematicians use "C-x M-c M-butterfly..." (view)
-
01:22P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article A Hippopotatomus/Minimalist ordinal notation: Minimalists use only one symbol. For example: 0 | 1 ||| 2 ||||| 3 ||||||| ω || ω+1 |||||| ω+2 |||... (view)
10 January 2021
-
14:25BestNoobReborn (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How to write ω_{ω^2}? on the article BestNoobReborn/eternal notation for fat infinities: so basically omega-null can be used, but sometimes we might run into a problem with the multiples of... (view)
-
14:22BestNoobReborn (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How to write ω_{ω^2}? on the article BestNoobReborn/eternal notation for fat infinities: Just to clarify- oh i'm gonna have to change that to omega-one plus x for more precision (view)
-
04:06P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I had an idea recently, what type of notation is (T,p)? I define a set of strings T, the elements of... on the article P進大好きbot/Relation between an OCF and an Ordinal Notation: > I don't understand how min becomes ambiguous based on the ambient set The "min" is defined for a p... (view)
-
02:18C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I had an idea recently, what type of notation is (T,p)? I define a set of strings T, the elements of... on the article P進大好きbot/Relation between an OCF and an Ordinal Notation: Sorry, I meant p(a) := min({ν∈Ad : ∀(b∈T)(b<a→p(b)∈ν)}), and the codomain of p should be... (view)
-
02:14A Hippopotatomus (talk | contribs) replied to the comment If n$ is n!*(n-1)!*(n-2)!*...*2!*1! instead of n!+(n-1)!+(n-2)!+...+2!+1!, then should it be a produ... on the article A Hippopotatomus/Factorial-growing hierarchy: Oops. I meant product. Corrected quite a few errors before, no idea how I missed that one. (view)
-
01:47P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I had an idea recently, what type of notation is (T,p)? I define a set of strings T, the elements of... on the article P進大好きbot/Relation between an OCF and an Ordinal Notation: Moreover, the range of p is not included in Ord. (Or the abbreviated ambient set of {ν : ∀(b∈T)... (view)
-
01:45P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I had an idea recently, what type of notation is (T,p)? I define a set of strings T, the elements of... on the article P進大好きbot/Relation between an OCF and an Ordinal Notation: But the o and the admissibility in the definition of p are ill-defined (at least in your comment). A... (view)
9 January 2021
-
23:43BestNoobReborn (talk | contribs) replied to the comment gothouzillionogol is defined as 37 kedrillion and guess what... a kedrillion&... on the article Sbiis Saibian/Introduction to Googology: that's genius that's literally genius (view)
-
20:12C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment 1. About the history of "stage cardinals": they were firstly imagined by me, then were used... on the article DontDrinkH20/Some Explanations of Certain Large Cardinals: AFAIK subtle cardinals themselves don't have rich structure. However, some assertions about subtle c... (view)
-
19:59C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Here is a big program: to reorder the cardinals in "Cantor's attic" by size. on the article DontDrinkH20/Some Explanations of Certain Large Cardinals: Intersting, I thought Σ_2-correct cardinals were even larger when ordered by size of least instance (view)
-
18:03C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Relation between an OCF and an Ordinal Notation: I had an idea recently, what type of notation is (T,p)? I define a set of strings T, the elements of... (view)
-
17:00C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article BestNoobReborn/eternal notation for fat infinities: How to write ω_{ω^2}? (view)
-
08:40Bloonsfamily (talk | contribs) edited a comment on the article PsiCubed2/Letter Notation Part II: Im a bit confused,because at the part where you explain L you say: Lx = LLLL...LLLL(10^frac(x)) with... (view)
-
08:38Bloonsfamily (talk | contribs) commented on the article PsiCubed2/Letter Notation Part II: Im a bit confused,because at the part where you explain L you say: Lx = LLLL...LLLL(10^frac(x)) with... (view)
8 January 2021
-
23:24XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I recommend studying Madore's ψ function first, and it's helpful to work out examples of the sets C... on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: Yes, that one (view)
6 January 2021
-
23:59C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment What are the rules of rewriting the hydra? on the article Tibby RHM/some sort of hydra function: It seems like these: 1) If the rightmost number is 1, remove it 2) If the rightmost number is m>1, t... (view)
-
23:57C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tibby RHM/some sort of hydra function: What are the rules of rewriting the hydra? (view)
-
23:53RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article VoidSansXD/ sand: S A N D F F F F F (view)
-
23:41VoidSansXD (talk | contribs) commented on the article VoidSansXD/uhhh coining random googological numbers because why the hell not: I have officially coined more numbers than jonathon bowers (very cool) (view)
-
16:06C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article A Hippopotatomus/Factorial-growing hierarchy: If n$ is n!*(n-1)!*(n-2)!*...*2!*1! instead of n!+(n-1)!+(n-2)!+...+2!+1!, then should it be a produ... (view)
-
14:13VoidSansXD (talk | contribs) replied to the comment bad on the article VoidSansXD/uhhh coining random googological numbers because why the hell not: pogger (view)
-
07:47Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: I see. Thanks for clarification. (view)
5 January 2021
-
23:54ReactorCoreZero (talk | contribs) replied to the comment bad on the article VoidSansXD/uhhh coining random googological numbers because why the hell not: You are smort (view)
-
20:05XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this a computation model? on the article XiTetrateiX/AAAA 5: more functions: Correct. (view)
-
17:46C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this a computation model? on the article XiTetrateiX/AAAA 5: more functions: My guess is that it's Turing complete (it looks possible to make systems like bitwise cyclic tags, b... (view)
-
17:45C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this a computation model? on the article XiTetrateiX/AAAA 5: more functions: OK (view)
-
17:42XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is this a computation model? on the article XiTetrateiX/AAAA 5: more functions: Well, an attempt at one. (view)
-
17:41C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/AAAA 5: more functions: Is this a computation model? (view)
-
06:52P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Unfortunately, the current version is ill-defined by many errors. (1) You need to define the domain ... on the article Rgetar/Buff function: > "", "c" have not base or booster, but in the program base and booster functions return "" for "" a... (view)
-
06:18Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Maybe (if "[cn] — Ω_n" correspondence is correct), but keep in mind that I found possible error w... (view)
-
05:55Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Unfortunately, the current version is ill-defined by many errors. (1) You need to define the domain ... on the article Rgetar/Buff function: "", "c" have not base or booster, but in the program base and booster functions return "" for "" and... (view)
-
05:11CaptainChurchill (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Do you mind helping new googologists like me and CreeperQuark72 make new array notations that are ve... on the article Username5243/Announcement: Ok I will read it :) Thank you. Anyways, do you want to help me with googology stuff, my discord is ... (view)
-
02:19Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: so the fastest grrowing function that this notation can build is faster than Tar(n)?🤔 (view)
-
00:35Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: If Tar(n)=f_c(c(...(Omega_n*2,0)...))(n), that is natural number, then naturl number k is [][][][]..... (view)
-
00:03VoidSansXD (talk | contribs) replied to the comment An edwin sockpuppet is obsessed with sandwiches which raises some flags about this blog post. on the article VoidSansXD/wow: people keep calling me edwin >:( (view)
-
00:02VoidSansXD (talk | contribs) commented on the article VoidSansXD/uhhh coining random googological numbers because why the hell not: bad (view)
4 January 2021
-
23:52C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I recommend studying Madore's ψ function first, and it's helpful to work out examples of the sets C... on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: "1st-order set theory" is a general term describing many different set theories, such as Kripke-Plat... (view)
-
23:44C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment An edwin sockpuppet is obsessed with sandwiches which raises some flags about this blog post. on the article VoidSansXD/wow: This isn't Edwin (view)
-
23:44C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article VoidSansXD/rant: Often Greek letters represent ordinals and cardinals, script letters represent operators (such as th... (view)
-
23:24VoidSansXD (talk | contribs) replied to the comment An edwin sockpuppet is obsessed with sandwiches which raises some flags about this blog post. on the article VoidSansXD/wow: are you fucking kidding me (view)
-
11:10Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article A Hippopotatomus/Factorial-growing hierarchy: I have thought of similar idea with slight twist to the definition: n!_0 = n+(n-1)+...+2+1 n!_1 = n*... (view)
-
03:01P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Unfortunately, the current version is ill-defined by many errors. (1) You need to define the domain ... (view)
-
02:58XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I recommend studying Madore's ψ function first, and it's helpful to work out examples of the sets C... on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: What about FOST? (view)
-
02:33XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How about defining f_0(n) = TREE(n), then define f_k(n) = TREE^n(n), a TREE hierarchy? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Tree Array Notation: It is ill defined anyways (all the stuff he makes is ill-defined anyways) (view)
-
01:39Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Can you show me how you write Tar(n) in this notation? and how to write the largest ordinal fundamem... (view)
3 January 2021
-
15:28Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: I found an error in converting rules in previous comment: C(Ω_n, Ω_n) → CΩ_nΩ_n (1st way) or (... (view)
-
07:46P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Rgetar/FGH-based notation for natural numbers: By the way, I created a transfinite extension of FGH. (I note that there are so many transfinite ext... (view)
-
01:46Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How about defining f_0(n) = TREE(n), then define f_k(n) = TREE^n(n), a TREE hierarchy? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Tree Array Notation: I meant f_k+1(n) = f_k^n(n). Sorry for the typo. (view)
-
01:44Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Tree Array Notation: How about defining f_0(n) = TREE(n), then define f_k(n) = TREE^n(n), a TREE hierarchy? (view)
2 January 2021
-
19:14Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: I tried to check are 2 ways of comparison of Taranovsky's C strings equivalent. The 1st way: C(a, b)... (view)
-
16:58Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Then yes, indeed, I noticed that "base-booster" is very similar to Taranovsky's C, for example, both... (view)
-
04:18Sharkic (talk | contribs) commented on the article Ubersketch/Googology SCP: Any english version? (view)
-
04:09Sharkic (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: I think hes talking about Tar(n)=f_c(c(...(Omega_n*2,0)...)(n), so likely yes indeed. (view)
-
02:49Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Ytosk/Rayo name of 65536 with 346 symbols: yep, you can change the title in advanced page setting. (view)
-
00:16Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: What is Tar? Is it something related to Taranovsky' C? (view)
1 January 2021
-
18:09RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment QWERTYUIOP on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: Oh wow 131073a is on Googology Wiki hi 131073a! (view)
-
16:17C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: Thanks. I've never done induction this way before, so I'll have to study this more (view)
-
07:43P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: OK. What you need to show is that for any a,b∈OT, a≦b implies o(a)≦o(b). You can show the asse... (view)
-
06:05Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Cool. Can it build a function that grows faster than Tar(n)? If yes, how? (view)
31 December 2020
-
15:17C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: I tried proving the fifth step once, and I don't understand how to prove it. (view)
-
13:03Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Or maybe "x" here corresponds to "c" in the old version, because in old version [c] = Ω [c2] = L [c... (view)
-
12:46Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: I think it can be estimated with help of cardinals used: [α], where α is cardinal. Using buff give... (view)
-
07:30Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Rgetar/Buff function: May I know what is the limit or supremum of this function? (view)
-
07:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: OK. The strategy is completely the same. For the convenience, I prefer to use 〈〉 instead of 0, b... (view)
-
06:42C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: Correction: The third line of the definition of o should say For a_0∈T, then o(〈a_0〉) := ω^{o... (view)
-
06:31C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: Sorry, I don't understand an example that complex; I'll try to write a similar example for CNF: Give... (view)
-
03:15P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: Finally, you can just restrict o to the subset of OT consisting elements smaller than <1,0>, which c... (view)
-
03:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: First, you check C_0(OFP)is closed under + and ψ, where OFP is the least omega fixed point. (You ca... (view)
-
02:32C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Ordinal Notation Associated to Extended Buchholz's OCF: Let α be the countable limit of extended Buchholz's function. What's an example of a proof sketch f... (view)
-
01:46Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a rule that applies to Ω[Ω_4+Ω_3]? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: That is α = β[X] = Ω[Ω_4+Ω_3] β = Ω X = Ω_4+Ω_3 cof(X) = Ω_3 (second Ω above α, so we ne... (view)
-
01:26Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a rule that applies to Ω[Ω_4+Ω_3]? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: PS.: what happened to Fandom?! How to edit and source edit comments now..? (view)
-
01:20Rgetar (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a rule that applies to Ω[Ω_4+Ω_3]? on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Yes, the Main rule. Fundamental sequence of Ω[Ω_4+Ω_3]: Ω[Ω_4+Ω_2] Ω[Ω_4+Ω_2[Ω_5+Ω_3]] Ω... (view)
30 December 2020
-
23:15C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Rgetar/Buff function: Is there a rule that applies to Ω[Ω_4+Ω_3]? (view)
-
22:03Torplex (talk | contribs) commented on the article Reinhardt-C/Incremental Games with the Largest Numbers!!!: Please add 'Exponential Idle' made by Conic Games. The highest known value possible in it is 1ee2000... (view)
29 December 2020
-
23:52P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: I see. Thank you. Anyway, which one is correct? (Since I cannot check discord, I cannot check whethe... (view)
-
16:23C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: They were likely introduced on Hyp_cos's "Taranovsky's various ordinal notations" subpage (view)
-
16:11RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: 5-ex-grand godgahlah got deleted. Why (view)
-
14:16Hyp cos (talk | contribs) commented on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: The abbreviation MP comes from this. On Taranovsky's page, only BP and its reflection configuration ... (view)
-
08:29P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: Hmm... Are MP and DRP standard terminologies? (If they are just used in discord, then it is good to ... (view)
-
04:57Antimony Star (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: > while the loop was discovered in the ordinal notation called "Degrees of Reflection with Passthrou... (view)
-
02:26C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Did Taranovsky ever prove the well-foundedness of MP relative to a large cardinal axiom? If so, this... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: One of Taranovsky's notation systems (I'm not sure which one, but I think it was different than this... (view)
-
00:10Gonz0TheGreatt (talk | contribs) commented on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: Did Taranovsky ever prove the well-foundedness of MP relative to a large cardinal axiom? If so, this... (view)
28 December 2020
-
06:46C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Someone on the Googology Discord said that ψ_{χ_0(0)}(Μ) is equal to ψ_{χ_0(0)}(ψ_{χ_Γ_{Μ+1... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: The second one appeared to be the intended meaning on the Discord message, thanks (view)
-
06:43P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: I see. Thank you. (view)
-
06:42P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Someone on the Googology Discord said that ψ_{χ_0(0)}(Μ) is equal to ψ_{χ_0(0)}(ψ_{χ_Γ_{Μ+1... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: Since "χ_{Γ_{Μ+1}}(0)" itslef is ill-defined, it depends on the meaning: If the one intends that ... (view)
-
06:40C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: AFAIK it's an open question, because Denis's numbers are defined using Taranovsky's ordinal notation... (view)
-
06:35P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: By the way, does anybody know the status of Denis's large numbers? They are defined by using TON, bu... (view)
-
06:30C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: Someone on the Googology Discord said that ψ_{χ_0(0)}(Μ) is equal to ψ_{χ_0(0)}(ψ_{χ_Γ_{Μ+1... (view)
-
06:29P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Ah yes, this is an old problem probably since the early years of GWiki. There's a lot of notations u... on the article P進大好きbot/Proposal on notability of analyses: Thank you for the opinion. > This is a problem, some Chinese googologists are already saying they do... (view)
-
05:54C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Antimony Star/News: MP in TON is not well founded: I was the editor of the TON page, however I didn't know what source to cite, so I added a link to th... (view)
-
04:27Antimony Star (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Proposal on notability of analyses: Ah yes, this is an old problem probably since the early years of GWiki. There's a lot of notations u... (view)
-
01:19P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How about Taranovsky's C? on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: Sure. Segments of this is weaker than TON, and segments of TON are weaker than this. (view)
27 December 2020
-
23:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Umm...wat? on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: The definition is written in the url cited in the blog post. (I am sorry that I am too lazy to trans... (view)
-
16:28C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How about Taranovsky's C? on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: Segments of this appear superficially weaker than second system TON, for example 00ZZZZ...CCCCC (pla... (view)
-
12:29Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Analysis of 三関数: How about Taranovsky's C? (view)
-
09:20C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Do you mind helping new googologists like me and CreeperQuark72 make new array notations that are ve... on the article Username5243/Announcement: Hi! I recommend reading some of Sbiis Saibian's webbook, One to Infinity: A Guide to the Finite. (view)
-
07:48
-
07:03QuasarBooster (talk | contribs) commented on the article HarryW12345/Blog 2: Linear Fast-Array Notation: You're probably right about the strength. I don't have time to analyze it all but 2-entry lists have... (view)
-
05:42CaptainChurchill (talk | contribs) commented on the article Username5243/Announcement: Do you mind helping new googologists like me and CreeperQuark72 make new array notations that are ve... (view)
26 December 2020
-
16:03RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: QWERTYUIOP (view)
-
13:52RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How are you defining Ω↑↑(ω+1)? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: Oh (view)
-
00:25C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How are you defining Ω↑↑(ω+1)? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: If Ω↑↑(ω+1) isn't defined, it's more difficult to define Ω↑↑Ω unless, for example succes... (view)
24 December 2020
-
23:19P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: I am afraid that you do not get what I meant. I am not asking how strong it is. (view)
-
16:20Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > obviously much stronger than X^^^^^X&n for any reasonable formalisation of BEAF In my formalizatio... (view)
-
12:17P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > And if I could define fast-growing function and state its limit, is it counted as right thing? Ple... (view)
-
10:40Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: Note that I will call one-layer array numbers with Bird's credit: "Bird's MO" (will be fully well-de... (view)
-
10:03Ytosk (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I guess that ψ_I WIN! works like the factorial of ψ_I WIN as the notation indecates, but I have no... on the article Nayuta Ito/Observations of YON: Ok, i'll fix it. (view)
23 December 2020
-
23:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment UNOCF has broken our Nayuta... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to M: Even if this Nayuta has been broken, the second and the third Nayutas will be back. (view)
-
23:09P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > By the way, when I finish formalizing BEAF up to X{X}X (that is, phi(omega,0,0) using ternary Vebl... (view)
-
23:04P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I guess that ψ_I WIN! works like the factorial of ψ_I WIN as the notation indecates, but I have no... on the article Nayuta Ito/Observations of YON: No. Ufortunately, it is just ill-defined. I guess that you do not even know the definition of an ord... (view)
-
21:57Tibby RHM (talk | contribs) commented on the article VoidSansXD/wow: An edwin sockpuppet is obsessed with sandwiches which raises some flags about this blog post. (view)
-
21:21Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment UNOCF has broken our Nayuta... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to M: Everything Nayuta makes is broken because Nayuta themself is broken. Now everything makes sense. (view)
-
19:35
-
19:35
-
18:41RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment What is ¡ or œ? Also, this is horribly ill-defined from the start. "HBIGGN will be like Hyperfacto... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/BIGGer than BIGG: WIP (view)
-
17:31Ytosk (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I guess that ψ_I WIN! works like the factorial of ψ_I WIN as the notation indecates, but I have no... on the article Nayuta Ito/Observations of YON: The notation is defined in my blog post: https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/User_blog:Ytosk/Ordinal_no... (view)
-
17:23Ytosk (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/Observations of YON: Wow, you made a blog post about my ordinal notation. That's cool You seem to use ψ_Ω instead of ψ... (view)
-
16:51Tibby RHM (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/BIGGer than BIGG: What is ¡ or œ? Also, this is horribly ill-defined from the start. "HBIGGN will be like Hyperfacto... (view)
-
16:09RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How are you defining Ω↑↑(ω+1)? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: QWERTYUIOP (view)
-
15:39Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > TREE, TON, Rayo's number I will say nothing about TREE because there is simply no "large" bound. T... (view)
-
15:02P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > If I throw my hands into all of this complicated mess - what I can do? Quite simple. You can state... (view)
-
14:46Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > Then do you now understand that you should not conclude any estimation of the limit? Of course. Bu... (view)
-
14:37Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > As I told you so many times, you should not estimate OCFs under assumptions based on "how they loo... (view)
-
14:30P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > I have no idea of it. Then do you now understand that you should not conclude any estimation of th... (view)
-
14:18Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > Do you know any fundamental sequence of ψ_{χ_0(0)}(ψ_{χ_M(1)}(1))? I have no idea of it. It's ... (view)
-
13:53P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: As I told you so many times, you should not estimate OCFs under assumptions based on "how they look ... (view)
-
13:43Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > ψ_{χ_0(0)}(Φ_{ψ_{χ_{φ_{M+1}(0)}(0)}(0)}(1)) The phi function is not used in "similar" psi-fu... (view)
-
12:53P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tetramur/Major ambiguities on BEAF: > It seems to be an extension of Rathjen's OCF. How can it be an extension, even though the expressi... (view)
22 December 2020
-
14:48Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: > as my advices on BEAF did not seem to help you so effetiently This was because I tried to define i... (view)
-
14:30Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Desired expansion of X^^X^2 [2]: X^^X^2 [2] = X^^2X (rule 7.3) X^^2X [2] = X^^(X+2) (rule 7.3) X^^(X... on the article Tetramur/BEAF using formal strings and operations (with proof of well-definedness): Now I compare it with ordinals using FGH and binary Veblen function. By construction and climbing me... (view)
-
11:18P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: As I said, I spent too much time to a single work by you. I will contribute to you in another way, a... (view)
-
10:04Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: By the way, I tried to make another formalization of BEAF up to X^^^X in separate blog post. If you ... (view)
-
09:34P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: > I just thought that a meta natural number that is uncomputable under some system T1 can be computa... (view)
-
09:27Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: > This is an uncommon terminology, as the least Goedel number of a proof of the inconsistency of PA ... (view)
-
07:49Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Desired expansion of X^^X^2 [2]: X^^X^2 [2] = X^^2X (rule 7.3) X^^2X [2] = X^^(X+2) (rule 7.3) X^^(X... on the article Tetramur/BEAF using formal strings and operations (with proof of well-definedness): I added new "inverse" rule so rules 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 become 6.3.1 and 6.3.2. Also I corrected rule 5.... (view)
-
07:35Tetramur (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tetramur/BEAF using formal strings and operations (with proof of well-definedness): Desired expansion of X^^X^2 [2]: X^^X^2 [2] = X^^2X (rule 7.3) X^^2X [2] = X^^(X+2) (rule 7.3) X^^(X... (view)
-
05:26P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: As I said, you are wrong. Stop being irrespondible. (view)
-
04:40Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: Well, if FN8 is fake, then FN7 is a fake too. (view)
21 December 2020
-
22:55P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The section for Ω_ω mentions "commutativity of the operator +", but is + a symbol in a string inst... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation: In other words, we use parentheses in an associative way in order to make expressions easier to read... (view)
-
22:17Tibby RHM (talk | contribs) replied to the comment UNOCF has broken our Nayuta... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to M: They were a great person, sad to see Nayuta broken into just saying nope no no nope no nope No nope ... (view)
-
16:43C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The section for Ω_ω mentions "commutativity of the operator +", but is + a symbol in a string inst... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation: Also the property a+(b+c)=(a+b)+c is associativity (view)
-
16:41C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation: The section for Ω_ω mentions "commutativity of the operator +", but is + a symbol in a string inst... (view)
-
12:28P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: Anyway, I am curious about why you want to spend your time to spread fakes, which you deeply know ar... (view)
-
12:14P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: So? It is irrelevant. You should be honestly respondible for what you wrote. (view)
-
10:47P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to M: UNOCF has broken our Nayuta... (view)
-
08:14Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: This blog is a response to someone who kept bugging me in blog 9.1.1. Otherwise I wouldn't bother to... (view)
-
08:06P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: It is irrelevant. Even if there are correct descriptions somewhere else, you should be honestly resp... (view)
-
07:45Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: I don't understand your point. This is open source after all. Others can learn how they wamt to, no ... (view)
-
07:33P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: I meant that what you wrote such as your implication "If this is ill defined, then Fish Number 7 is ... (view)
-
06:27Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: I don't have to prove it as it is already defined by you. I am an engineer, I don't have to reinvent... (view)
-
04:51P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: The implication is wrong. As I said, you should not dishoestly state what you cannot prove. (view)
-
03:19Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: If this is ill defined, then Fish Number 7 is ill defined too. (view)
20 December 2020
-
23:09P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: Uh, I got that you are talking about USG(D)CS_(2)(n). (view)
-
23:06P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: > replaced by USG(D)CS(2) of some reasonable n I guess that you are talking about USG(D)CS(n). > If ... (view)
-
22:42HarryW12345 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: I just put parentheses for clarification, you can omit it. (view)
-
20:12RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment How are you defining Ω↑↑(ω+1)? on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: ??? I don't know what you mean I never put that there. (view)
-
20:11RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment "3rd infinite number" What do you mean? omega+2? or say zeta naught as in {omega,epsilon 0, zeta 0,.... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: I would need to clarify that it can be infinite. (view)
-
19:15Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: I would ask of basically the same thing, only BB(1919) is replaced by USG(D)CS(2) of some reasonable... (view)
-
16:16P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: The "finitemess" is not so meaningful, because even Rato(10^100) coincides with the output of a cons... (view)
-
14:28Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: This argument is similar to the uncomputability of Busy Beaver function but if we pick some specific... (view)
-
11:41P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: No, it is just ill-defined. (Please study what you wrote, as there are so many misconceptions as I h... (view)
-
11:34P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tetramur/USG(D)CS(2) and ZFC: The unprovability of the totality does not imply the unprovability of the pointwise well-definedness... (view)
-
09:47Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: Naive extension or not, it produces fastest growing functions in Ton family. (view)
-
09:45Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: Yep, it's copied from Fish Number 7 definition, with Rayo's function replaced with LNG function. (view)
19 December 2020
-
22:13C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: How are you defining Ω↑↑(ω+1)? (view)
-
17:17Tibby RHM (talk | contribs) replied to the comment "3rd infinite number" What do you mean? omega+2? or say zeta naught as in {omega,epsilon 0, zeta 0,.... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: So shouldn't you have put theta or x or something that would make sense instead of 3rd number? (view)
18 December 2020
-
20:15RomaronzoTHEThingy (talk | contribs) replied to the comment "3rd infinite number" What do you mean? omega+2? or say zeta naught as in {omega,epsilon 0, zeta 0,.... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: Yes. (view)
-
15:35XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment "3rd infinite number" What do you mean? omega+2? or say zeta naught as in {omega,epsilon 0, zeta 0,.... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: No, he means a third variable. (view)
-
02:48P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment In the third approach, you have not defined < and hence the correspondence is obviously ill-defined.... on the article Alemagno12/Another way of generating ordinals: > and proving that O is well-defined. How do we prove it? I do not have a way without using well-ord... (view)
-
02:44Alemagno12 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment In the third approach, you have not defined < and hence the correspondence is obviously ill-defined.... on the article Alemagno12/Another way of generating ordinals: Fixed (view)
-
01:43P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment OCFs by Rathjen or Stegert are unnecessarily complicated in some way. They aimed for ordinal... on the article Ubersketch/A proposal for a standard: If you drop it, then the behaviour of ψ might change a little. Then the natural map T(K)→On might... (view)
-
01:40P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment In the third approach, you have not defined < and hence the correspondence is obviously ill-defined.... on the article Alemagno12/Another way of generating ordinals: > define a set S of strings/trees/some other structure (an "expression"), make a function that takes... (view)
-
01:39Alemagno12 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment In the third approach, you have not defined < and hence the correspondence is obviously ill-defined.... on the article Alemagno12/Another way of generating ordinals: Fixed (view)
-
00:52Sharkic (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: Why did i forget "copied" (view)
-
00:50Sharkic (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: You literally almost every word, you could at least reword it differently. (view)
-
00:48Sharkic (talk | contribs) commented on the article Msiajoe74/A10- Fish Number 8: This is just a naive extension, add some symbols, stop copying the words and just modifying it like ... (view)
-
00:41Sharkic (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/Really Disgusting Crusty Water Bottle Number!: Nice... Anyway- (view)
-
00:39Sharkic (talk | contribs) commented on the article DerivedSugar177/Possible system for inaccessible cardinals: S(Aleph_1,0) = N_N... with N_N with N_N_0 is wrong. S(Aleph_1,0) simply means N_N_...with N_N ... wi... (view)
-
00:32Sharkic (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: This comment is incorrect, {{3,2},2} does not mean {4,2}, it means {7,2}. Therefore the believe it g... (view)
-
00:29Sharkic (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: Why is it {{({{{3}}}),2},2}? (view)
-
00:22Sharkic (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/SOME MORE INFINITE NUMBERS YES OKAY: "3rd infinite number" What do you mean? omega+2? or say zeta naught as in {omega,epsilon 0, zeta 0,.... (view)
17 December 2020
-
18:56C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment OCFs by Rathjen or Stegert are unnecessarily complicated in some way. They aimed for ordinal... on the article Ubersketch/A proposal for a standard: *for example, where is the importance of α∈C(α,ρ)? (view)
-
18:55C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment OCFs by Rathjen or Stegert are unnecessarily complicated in some way. They aimed for ordinal... on the article Ubersketch/A proposal for a standard: I don't understand how the condition of "(T(K),<) is a recursive interpretation of the ∈-relation"... (view)
-
05:21HarryW12345 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: If you consider the limit of the notation, {a,a} should grow at a rate approximately equivalent to f... (view)
-
05:20HarryW12345 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: I don't think you get it. {3,3} = {{{3,2},2},2} = {{({{{3}}}),2},2} = {{6,2},2} = {12,2} = 24, not 1... (view)
16 December 2020
-
21:04XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) commented on the article Rgetar/Finitely repeated symbol sequences: Copy Notation (view)
-
18:18DaveRainbowin (talk | contribs) commented on the article DaveRainbowin/Turing Complete Ordinal: Help i dont get the joke anymore also help fandom's crappy comment whatever makes every comment star... (view)
15 December 2020
-
21:57QuasarBooster (talk | contribs) commented on the article Moathon/The size of G(1): This has some shitpost energy... (view)
-
09:01Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Please refer here: https://bitcoinbadger.blogspot.com/2020/08/power-tower-3-and-up-arrows.html on the article Moathon/The size of G(1): Or refer https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Grahal (view)
-
08:59Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Moathon/The size of G(1): Please refer here: https://bitcoinbadger.blogspot.com/2020/08/power-tower-3-and-up-arrows.html (view)
-
08:26QuasarBooster (talk | contribs) commented on the article Mango523WNR/Increase Very Slow But Divergent Series: This was very difficult to read, but yes. If x = 246384 then your sum > 2. If x = 10^554824 then you... (view)
-
07:57QuasarBooster (talk | contribs) commented on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: Good job, it's nice and simple! Your notation does indeed keep up with \(f_\omega\). Keep up the goo... (view)
-
02:30P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I don't understand the "soundness of ZFC" by itself, would whether ZFC is sound with respect to a de... on the article P進大好きbot/Computable googology in ZFC set theory beyond the transcendental integer system: Soundness is quite similar to the consistency. If you imagined it by natural language, then it would... (view)
14 December 2020
-
19:58Antimony Star (talk | contribs) commented on the article Rgetar/Ordinal Explorer Online: I looked in the source code, and I was wondering the case where ceil(a,b) reaches the situation wher... (view)
-
16:50XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Can I try to make something that revises on it? (might be controversial though) (view)
-
16:49XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Mind blown! (view)
-
16:35XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: Which is less than f(2,n) in FGH (view)
-
15:30Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: By the way, it is nearly impossible to make a case classification in the case of BEAF. I have to def... (view)
-
14:48C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I don't understand the "soundness of ZFC" by itself, would whether ZFC is sound with respect to a de... on the article P進大好きbot/Computable googology in ZFC set theory beyond the transcendental integer system: Also for Σ_1-soundness as well (view)
-
14:45C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Computable googology in ZFC set theory beyond the transcendental integer system: I don't understand the "soundness of ZFC" by itself, would whether ZFC is sound with respect to a de... (view)
-
01:49C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment In what way does this not admit exactly the same translation into forests as the two-dimensional cas... on the article C7X/Large numbers related to multiverse hypotheticals: I think that it admits the same translation (view)
13 December 2020
-
23:41FundamentalSeq (talk | contribs) commented on the article C7X/Large numbers related to multiverse hypotheticals: In what way does this not admit exactly the same translation into forests as the two-dimensional cas... (view)
-
06:13
-
06:12
-
04:15Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment ... on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: 0(Ωω) is not phi(phi(omega,0),0,0) its phi(omega,0,0) (view)
12 December 2020
-
14:01Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: In the slow growing hierarchy it grows less than g_omega^omega(n)=n^n (view)
-
14:00Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article HarryW12345/Blog 1: My New Notation: I believe it grows at the rate of doubling. {7,2}={{{{{{{7,1},1},1},1},1},1},1}=14 {2,2}={{2,1},1}={... (view)
-
05:09Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article DerivedSugar177/Possible system for inaccessible cardinals: Do you mean N_N... ( with N_0 of N's) = S(1,0)? (view)
11 December 2020
-
02:30P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment In the third approach, you have not defined < and hence the correspondence is obviously ill-defined.... on the article Alemagno12/Another way of generating ordinals: Sorry, I submitted a comment before I clarify the reason why < has not defined: There are several ca... (view)
-
02:27P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Alemagno12/Another way of generating ordinals: In the third approach, you have not defined < and hence the correspondence is obviously ill-defined.... (view)
10 December 2020
-
18:26GamesFan2000 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment What is (()())? on the article XiTetrateiX/attempt 2 at a function: Seems like Tetratei forgot to use that one. (view)
-
17:22C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/attempt 2 at a function: What is (()())? (view)
-
02:00P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: I guess that such explosion of cells should be treated as cancer :O (view)
9 December 2020
-
23:53XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: He said he lost -99999 . . . braincells Which means a double negative which means he gained 99999999... (view)
-
23:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: > How the ordinal notation works No, it is not an ordinal notation ay any rate. As I said, you do no... (view)
-
18:29Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: I shouldve fixed it. (view)
-
18:14Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Case 2 works for any 0(a,b,1,...,1,1) with some amount of 1's. (view)
-
14:50IsTakenIsTaken (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: There is no rule applicable to 0(0,3,3) Cases 2 and 3 are the only ones applicable to 3+ arguments. ... (view)
-
12:35P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The nums aren't in blog posts because I didn't feel like spamming the blog post system. on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Nums: If you want to post something personal, please use your personal space such as the blog post and the... (view)
-
05:25P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: I see. Thank you. (view)
-
05:23C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: The section on Ω vs. nesting seems correct. I don't know enough about the formalities of models to ... (view)
-
05:22P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This page has been moved to your personal space, because it is not allowed in this wiki to create an... on the article Tekaplex/Pijadeatillion: Thank you. (view)
-
05:15C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This page has been moved to your personal space, because it is not allowed in this wiki to create an... on the article Tekaplex/Pijadeatillion: OK, I removed it (view)
-
03:52Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Have you read blog A9 and A9.1? The answer for SCG(⍵) is there. (view)
-
02:56Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Nums: The nums aren't in blog posts because I didn't feel like spamming the blog post system. (view)
-
02:45P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: @12AbBa I recommend you not to waste much time. As you know, the OP does not even understand what he... (view)
-
02:37C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: Thanks, I'll read them in a bit (view)
-
02:25P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: Done. Please tell me if there are some typos or something that should be corrected. (view)
-
02:0412AbBa (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Yeah right "combine blogs" how do u do that (view)
-
00:56C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: OK (view)
-
00:52P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: OK. I will add them later. Thank you. (view)
-
00:41C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: Clarification Does Ω mean "nesting" in an OCF? (view)
-
00:38C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/List of common mistakes in googology: I have ideas for some more sections Does Ω mean "nesting"? Is the satisfaction relation (S,∈) |= ... (view)
8 December 2020
-
23:28Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Lel (view)
-
22:43P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Alright so basically I define 0(n) = omega^n. If 0(n) = omega^n, then 0(0(n)) = omega^omega^n, 0(Ω)... on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: ... (view)
-
22:40P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: I am glad to hear that you have a close friend in your school. (view)
-
19:32C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: I recommend studying Madore's ψ function first, and it's helpful to work out examples of the sets C... (view)
-
19:06Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: By the way, I started researching higher-level operators. I could easily define A & X & n for A is a... (view)
-
18:46Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: ... (view)
-
18:34Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/I need help understanding 2 things.: Alright so basically I define 0(n) = omega^n. If 0(n) = omega^n, then 0(0(n)) = omega^omega^n, 0(Ω)... (view)
-
18:07Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment first!!1 on the article VoidSansXD/totally epic function: S,ec.h_in#d!???!!!:!) (view)
-
18:06Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment first!!1 on the article VoidSansXD/totally epic function: Second (view)
-
18:06Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Oops!!! Look like you lost -999999999999999999999999999 brain cells! What should you do?! ... on the article VoidSansXD/totally epic function: But what part makes it offensive? I'm not saying "go die" or saying "haha what kind of [bla] is that... (view)
-
16:41Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Updated (view)
-
16:39Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: no (view)
-
16:28Hyponumo12 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: I am 12 and I agree with Tfgyhujikolp. He is my fellow classmate in school. We both love googology (view)
-
15:20P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: You have never written down the definition of θ. It is the same as something like saying "My number... (view)
-
15:16Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know how do you expand 0(0,3)? on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Trimthet: This looks interesting. (view)
-
15:15Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know how do you expand 0(0,3)? on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Trimthet: Thanks for explanation. (view)
-
14:20P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Oops!!! Look like you lost -999999999999999999999999999 brain cells! What should you do?! ... on the article VoidSansXD/totally epic function: Joking cannot be an excuse of insulting others. At least, since you are quite new here, you seem not... (view)
-
13:39Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Oops!!! Look like you lost -999999999999999999999999999 brain cells! What should you do?! ... on the article VoidSansXD/totally epic function: How am I offending? It was obvious I was just joking around and same with him. (view)
-
13:37Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: What part makes it ill defined? Is it the whole thing itself? (view)
-
13:36Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know how do you expand 0(0,3)? on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Trimthet: Why is 0(0,3,1,...n 1's...,1,1) equal to phi(omega^^^...n...^^^omega,0)? It extends on 0(0,2), so no... (view)
-
13:33Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know how do you expand 0(0,3)? on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Trimthet: Its ill defined just like pbot and others said. Its lots of examples. 0(0,1) with n 1's = n. 0(0,2) ... (view)
-
13:19Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know how do you expand 0(0,3)? on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Trimthet: To be simple, 0(0,n) expands into 0(0,n-1,n-1,n-1,...,n-1,n-1). However the amount of n-1's is what ... (view)
-
13:16Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment May I know how do you expand 0(0,3)? on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Trimthet: 0(0,3) expands into 0(0,2,2,2,...,2,2,2) where there is omega 2's. For information on the twos, go t... (view)
-
13:01Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Trimthet: May I know how do you expand 0(0,3)? (view)
-
04:01P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Thank you. (view)
-
04:00P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This page has been moved to your personal space, because it is not allowed in this wiki to create an... on the article Tekaplex/Pijadeatillion: Thank you. But please remove the nab box template and the deletion tag, too, because they automatica... (view)
-
03:51C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: OK (view)
-
03:51C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This page has been moved to your personal space, because it is not allowed in this wiki to create an... on the article Tekaplex/Pijadeatillion: Removed categories (view)
-
03:47P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Obviously no, as the OP states that it goes beyond BB(10^100). The "work" is just insulting other go... (view)
-
03:13C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: Is there a set of rules for how this notation expands, for example like Bowers's Linear Array Notati... (view)
-
02:54P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This page has been moved to your personal space, because it is not allowed in this wiki to create an... on the article Tekaplex/Pijadeatillion: By the way, it is not allowed to add a blog post to categories for the main space. Therefore could y... (view)
-
02:31P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Theta Array Ordinal Notation: It is meaningless to state the limit, as it is ill-defined... Maybe you should study what an ordinal... (view)
7 December 2020
-
02:34Tibby RH (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Ok, so this is pretty interesting, but it is FAR too complex for me (or most people) to understand. ... on the article Licorneuhh/Pehan Notation: It is not complex tbh once you get the gist of it (view)
-
02:30Tibby RH (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Oh god the DNA ordinal on the article Antimony Star/about the embi situation: Not the DNA ordinal (view)
-
01:56Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: See blog A9 and A9.1 to know about notation ↥. (view)
6 December 2020
-
23:08P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tekaplex/Pijadeatillion: This page has been moved to your personal space, because it is not allowed in this wiki to create an... (view)
-
07:24P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Oops!!! Look like you lost -999999999999999999999999999 brain cells! What should you do?! ... on the article VoidSansXD/totally epic function: Hi. Could you stop offending the OP? You might be enjoying chatting with the OP as if he or she were... (view)
-
01:48Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article Klasky1/Extensible matrix system: I'm pretty sure Trio Sequence already exists, unless your thinking about something else. (view)
-
01:39Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article VoidSansXD/totally epic function: Oops!!! Look like you lost -999999999999999999999999999 brain cells! What should you do?! ... (view)
-
01:32Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment What is the L hierarchy? Also how is it derived from Large Number Garden Number. on the article Msiajoe74/A10.1- Infinity Scraper: Giga TON: Wait im blind sorry. (view)
-
01:16Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment What is the L hierarchy? Also how is it derived from Large Number Garden Number. on the article Msiajoe74/A10.1- Infinity Scraper: Giga TON: See blog A10. (view)
-
00:27Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article Msiajoe74/A10.1- Infinity Scraper: Giga TON: What is the L hierarchy? Also how is it derived from Large Number Garden Number. (view)
5 December 2020
-
18:44Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: In general, a structure in pentational arrays consists of one or several X's and natural numbers, se... (view)
-
15:47P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/RomaronzoTHEThingy's Illion Extension: You are not allowed to put your blog post in catgories for the main space. You are told to read the ... (view)
-
15:42Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: And then idea struck my mind. What if I define some "main groups of expressions" and trying to defin... (view)
-
12:5012AbBa (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: And so how do you define SCG of an ordinal ?! (view)
-
06:23Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) commented on the article Naruyoko/PEGG detailed log/P: What do you do now that the chart is too big? I suggest splitting the table, but if you come up with... (view)
4 December 2020
-
23:21P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > My work is like a program. When compiler gives me an error then I try to correct it until no more ... (view)
-
18:33Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Many of these issues are not serious, but I'll correct them. I'll go to the serious ones. > What doe... (view)
-
18:23GamesFan2000 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Fejfo/An explanation of greatly mahlos and generalisation: So much Mahlo-ness (view)
-
15:13Fejfo (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I guess a cardinal κ that is κ-Greatly-Mahlo might play a role similar to ψ_ν((1,ψ_ν((2,1,()),... on the article Fejfo/An explanation of greatly mahlos and generalisation: I think the n-greatly-malho operator might play a similar role to Π_n in OCFs but I don't understan... (view)
-
14:48C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Fejfo/An explanation of greatly mahlos and generalisation: I guess a cardinal κ that is κ-Greatly-Mahlo might play a role similar to ψ_ν((1,ψ_ν((2,1,()),... (view)
-
14:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Define successor structure as element of PE which is of the form Add(g,1) for some g and standard,... (view)
-
13:20Moooosey (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is illdefined :( First off, the two rules about ☺ are conflicting since, for instance, is 5 =... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/☺ Notation Thingy: Yeah, + is just too confusing (view)
-
12:34Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I edited the blog post. So, it is your turn to check the rules. (view)
-
11:28P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Then could you please update the blog post, if you are ready for my checking the rules? (view)
-
09:51Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > you have not fully given the algorithm There is actually a mistake in my starting definition. For ... (view)
-
06:18P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > For X+1+1 it might not exist, but it is not in SPE anymore and we must standardize it before we ca... (view)
-
05:31Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > ordinals... I will return to this topic once I will give full definition of pentational arrays. > ... (view)
3 December 2020
-
16:34XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment The limit of this notation is probably somewhere in f(w^w^w,n) or f(w^w,n) on the article XiTetrateiX/Some fast growing function I thought of: Finally made a notation with a limit of w^^3!!!! YASSSS (view)
-
16:29XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Nice but what do you mean by "like omega"? Please explain that part, since it could mean the growth ... on the article XiTetrateiX/Another function again again: Omega in the fast growing hierarchy is f(n,n). so maybe (a:1) is most likely like omega, or (a,a,a). (view)
-
16:25XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is illdefined :( First off, the two rules about ☺ are conflicting since, for instance, is 5 =... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/☺ Notation Thingy: They should have used a comma or an underspace or anything else besides a plus symbol. (view)
-
16:24XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is illdefined :( First off, the two rules about ☺ are conflicting since, for instance, is 5 =... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/☺ Notation Thingy: Also, why did they use the plus symbol? That would make it confusing if it were like ☺(a+(b+c)) (view)
-
16:23XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is illdefined :( First off, the two rules about ☺ are conflicting since, for instance, is 5 =... on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/☺ Notation Thingy: To be honest, this kid is like 8 years old. Every "object thingy" account has got to be at least 8 y... (view)
-
07:08P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Do I correctly understand that if some notation transcends Rathjen's ordinal notations, then it wo... (view)
-
06:33Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Where did you clarify the restriction? My bad. I didn't mention it before. > Also, even if you ass... (view)
-
05:47P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > It is simply wrong, because of one reason. If we restrict FSs to some systems that actually use re... (view)
-
05:01Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Are you regarding them as ordinal notations? To make it clear: I define ON as (possibly non-recur... (view)
-
01:52C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Hyp cos/TON, stable ordinals, and my array notation: A related citation to Σ_2-admissibility is theorem 2.3 of E. Kranakis"Reflection and partition prop... (view)
2 December 2020
-
23:26P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > It is supposed to be wrong, using Klev ordinal notations (O+ and O++). They are not ordinal notati... (view)
-
20:02Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > BB can't and similar It is supposed to be wrong, using Klev ordinal notations (O+ and O++). Note t... (view)
-
19:37Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I note that I tried every single possibility and it still doesn't work. I doubt now it will work one... (view)
30 November 2020
-
15:06Moooosey (talk | contribs) commented on the article RomaronzoTHEThingy/☺ Notation Thingy: This is illdefined :( First off, the two rules about ☺ are conflicting since, for instance, is 5 =... (view)
-
01:56Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Σ↑...Σ is at the bottom of Σ tower. See Example above. (view)
-
00:1912AbBa (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Again, what is at the bottom of the Σ tower? SMH all ill-defined (view)
29 November 2020
-
22:44P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > No function can transcend all ordinal notations. Wrong. BB surpasses it. > I think there is way t... (view)
-
15:35Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Please parse it as ((a structure) of (the language)) whose ((underlying set) consists of ((ordinal... (view)
-
14:16P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > "a structure of the language whose underlying set consists of ordinals such that the interpretatio... (view)
-
08:16Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Then I could not find "set of the language". Could you specify the full sentence including the phr... (view)
28 November 2020
-
23:15P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > That's it, actually. Right, it is on that article. Then I could not find "set of the language". Co... (view)
-
19:24Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Task: by direct expansion show that {2,2//(1)//2} = 4. Proof: {2,2/2} = 2 & 2 = {2,2} = 4 {2,2//2} =... (view)
-
18:09Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Where is the precise sentence? I guess that you suddenly started to talk about the article on OCFs... (view)
-
16:47Doomdivine1 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment So i have a doubt what is oblivion and utter oblivion as per this logic(I mean a specific value)? on the article Ytosk/Trying again to define Bowers' K(n) systems and more: So is N(γ0,Utter Oblivion) the largest finite named number ever? (view)
-
11:56P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > What is the "first-order language"? A first order language is a formal notion of a language in mat... (view)
-
11:27Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: P.S. And I'd ask to you: maybe we will not distract from the topic and will do the formalization of ... (view)
-
11:00Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Or were you so confident because you have read so many mathematical papers or you have several fri... (view)
-
07:55Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: T(Σ, F<sub>8</sub>(SCG(n))) = ...Σ↑<sup>Σ↑<sup>Σ↑<sup>Σ</sup>Σ</sup>Σ</sup>Σ... (with ... (view)
-
04:52Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: See zillion. (view)
-
02:40Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: The only reason I used SCG(n) is that SCG(1) gives the biggest value among all other functions for n... (view)
-
02:28Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Could you tell me whether we can expand Σ like we do for ϵ_0, φ(ω,0), SVO, LVO, etc ? If yes, th... (view)
27 November 2020
-
23:04P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Please show me the way to do this by simple example. ] Let ψ_α(β) denote an OCF with an ordinal... (view)
-
19:43Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > What are three main hydras? Kirby-Paris hydra, Beklemishev's worms and Buchholz' hydra. > Difficu... (view)
-
18:44Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I think Case 4 could be ill-defined because the arithmetical operations aren't unique (e.g. 2*2=2^2=... on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Percentage Array Notation (WIP): I mean I guess they are kinda ill defined but they can still just be compared differently, they stil... (view)
-
16:08P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Note that three main hydras What are three main hydras? > but at least this is very difficult. Dif... (view)
-
14:14Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Could you tell me a reason? Making a hydra-game is one of a standard direction in proof theory, an... (view)
-
12:38P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > The hydra-like recursive system is almost impossible on the limits of TON because it is almost imp... (view)
-
11:10Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > One of the biggest problems that make all analyses of TON unreliable is that we do not have a sing... (view)
-
09:39P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Is it related to the algorithm above? (view)
-
09:27Ytosk (talk | contribs) replied to the comment So i have a doubt what is oblivion and utter oblivion as per this logic(I mean a specific value)? on the article Ytosk/Trying again to define Bowers' K(n) systems and more: In this reply, i'll just assume that things such as α-systems can exist (which may be incorrect) > ... (view)
-
06:07C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I don't know the details, but Hyp_cos said "there is proof about how monotonic FS 1-1 corresponds on... (view)
-
05:07C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Percentage Array Notation (WIP): I think Case 4 could be ill-defined because the arithmetical operations aren't unique (e.g. 2*2=2^2=... (view)
-
02:32Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tfgyhujikolp/Can someone measure the size of this Python code: The function changes every run. So I translate run n = f(n). Whats the growth rate of f(n)? (view)
26 November 2020
-
22:41P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: You mean, it is known to be a correct programm, right? As far as I know, hyp cos's algorithm is too ... (view)
-
16:57C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I would like to interject that this is a helpful page for calculating TON's fundamental sequences ht... (view)
-
15:39Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Then there's "The largest ordinal should be Σ, the last ordinal defined in ITTM." at this point you... (view)
-
15:07P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Einstein was also seemingly aiming at a wrong direction, but he invented new theories in physics. ... (view)
-
14:35Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Trying to interpret the post: your f1 is around growth rate \(\omega\) (exponential-increasing nu... on the article Msiajoe74/1- My Fastest Growing Function: But its very likely that its not that interpretation. (view)
-
14:33Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Trying to interpret the post: your f1 is around growth rate \(\omega\) (exponential-increasing nu... on the article Msiajoe74/1- My Fastest Growing Function: Depends, but you could interpret it differently. If f0(n) (^f0(n)) f0(n) means to iterate n times, i... (view)
-
14:10Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/Another function again again: Nice but what do you mean by "like omega"? Please explain that part, since it could mean the growth ... (view)
-
09:38Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Hmm... I am afraid that you are aiming at a wrong direction... Einstein was also seemingly aiming ... (view)
-
08:13P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment oO(Is the correction for NIECF up to M^M^ω and T^T^ω completed..?) on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to SDO: OK. Stages are technically Mahlo, metastages are 2-technically Mahlo, and metametastages are 3-techn... (view)
-
08:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Hmm... I am afraid that you are aiming at a wrong direction... > In analysis of TON by Boboris02 I n... (view)
-
07:47Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > In analysis of TON This is not clear. I meant {L,X,1,1,X^^X}n,n in BEAF. The growth rate of {L,X,1... (view)
-
06:34Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > In my opinion, it is easier to define PE only using 0, 1, X^(), and so on, i,e, without using 2 or... (view)
-
03:32Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/Some fast growing function I thought of: The limit of this notation is probably somewhere in f(w^w^w,n) or f(w^w,n) (view)
-
03:3012AbBa (talk | contribs) commented on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: You see why P-bot and the others are ignoring your posts? You are literally breaking every rule of g... (view)
-
03:01Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Also whats a "zillion"? (view)
-
03:00Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Thanks if you fix it. (view)
-
02:59Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: Actually there are other errors with this too, what is "the fastest function is F_8(n)", also what d... (view)
-
02:54Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) commented on the article Msiajoe74/A9.1.1- ton, Ton and TON: I'm not a big fan of just mashing up random numbers (which is a salad number). Aside from that its p... (view)
25 November 2020
-
23:27Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment oO(Is the correction for NIECF up to M^M^ω and T^T^ω completed..?) on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to SDO: Stages is to Mahlo as Mahlos is to inaccessibles. They are technically Mahlo because Cmp(M_T,T)=0, b... (view)
-
22:46Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Pretty sure this is just a salad number/naïve extension on the article Ivan Stepanov/Treeillion: Well yeah. (view)
-
20:35Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I still don't understand Taranovsky's notation. on the article Hyp cos/Taranovsky has updated his ordinal notation page: Oh wait I cant delete my comment I meant Taranovsky's ordinal notation not BHO but it doesn't really... (view)
-
20:33Tfgyhujikolp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I still don't understand Taranovsky's notation. on the article Hyp cos/Taranovsky has updated his ordinal notation page: Many people only understand it up to the BHO, including me. I think ψ-1(ψ-1(ψ-1(...(ψ-1(0)))...)... (view)
-
04:34P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment oO(Is the correction for NIECF up to M^M^ω and T^T^ω completed..?) on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to SDO: I am curious about whether stages are Mahlo or not. (view)
-
03:45Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment oO(Is the correction for NIECF up to M^M^ω and T^T^ω completed..?) on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to SDO: K=C(1;0;0), so Tier 1. K is Mahlo, but another Mahlo. (view)
24 November 2020
-
01:34
23 November 2020
-
16:33Fejfo (talk | contribs) commented on the article Alemagno12/An OCF that doesn't get stuck: A trick that can be used to make an "OCF that doesn't get stuck" is to define $$ \psi(\alpha) = \min... (view)
22 November 2020
-
21:17C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Note that ψ_Ω(0)=1, then C_0(1,β) is a nonstrict superset of δ(1)=C(1,χ(1)). C(1,χ(1)) contain... on the article Alemagno12/An OCF that doesn't get stuck: Assuming well-definedness of δ (view)
-
21:17C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Alemagno12/An OCF that doesn't get stuck: Note that ψ_Ω(0)=1, then C_0(1,β) is a nonstrict superset of δ(1)=C(1,χ(1)). C(1,χ(1)) contain... (view)
-
15:45P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Ivan Stepanov/Treeillion: @admins This blocked user added this number to a category for numbers in the main space. I asked an ... (view)
21 November 2020
-
15:17Doomdivine1 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment So i have a doubt what is oblivion and utter oblivion as per this logic(I mean a specific value)? on the article Ytosk/Trying again to define Bowers' K(n) systems and more: ? (view)
-
10:01P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment oO(Is the correction for NIECF up to M^M^ω and T^T^ω completed..?) on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to SDO: By the way, where is K? Tier 1.1? (view)
-
02:08Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment oO(Is the correction for NIECF up to M^M^ω and T^T^ω completed..?) on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to SDO: M^M^w, maybe T^T^w, such a thing does not exist (view)
20 November 2020
-
18:05XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Test comment. on the article Kyodaisuu/Test:'''This page is a candidate for deletion.
The reason given is: Test Deletion..''' If you disagree with its deletion, please explain why at [[Category talk:Candidates for deletion]] or improve the page and remove the {{ [[Template:delete|delete]]}} tag. Remember to check [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Special:SocialActivity|what links here]] and [https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Special:SocialActivity?action=history the page history] before deleting.
[[Category:Candidates for deletion]] (view) -
16:23XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment My guess for the current limit is ~f(w2,n) on the article XiTetrateiX/Some fast growing function I thought of: ~f(w*o,n) is the limit for {m,o} (view)
-
03:11P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to SDO: oO(Is the correction for NIECF up to M^M^ω and T^T^ω completed..?) (view)
-
01:09P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Alemagno12/An OCF that doesn't get stuck: Ill-defined because the partial specialisation of δ includes circular logic. It is a quite typical ... (view)
19 November 2020
-
18:33C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article RickXPEEp0/Prototype arrays: How does a#(1)#b expand? (view)
-
17:07Doomdivine1 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment So i have a doubt what is oblivion and utter oblivion as per this logic(I mean a specific value)? on the article Ytosk/Trying again to define Bowers' K(n) systems and more: Also using N(α,n) as the smallest natural number larger than every natural number definable using n... (view)
-
16:29C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment My guess for the current limit is ~f(w2,n) on the article XiTetrateiX/Some fast growing function I thought of: The {m,o}'s math isn't loading for me, so this estimation is for #_{m,2} n (view)
-
16:25C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/Some fast growing function I thought of: My guess for the current limit is ~f(w2,n) (view)
18 November 2020
-
17:01Doomdivine1 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment So i have a doubt what is oblivion and utter oblivion as per this logic(I mean a specific value)? on the article Ytosk/Trying again to define Bowers' K(n) systems and more: Is N(γ0,Utter Oblivion) bigger than utter oblivion as in can you explain it in more detail, and as ... (view)
-
13:35Ytosk (talk | contribs) replied to the comment So i have a doubt what is oblivion and utter oblivion as per this logic(I mean a specific value)? on the article Ytosk/Trying again to define Bowers' K(n) systems and more: The problem i have with the original description of Utter Oblivion is that Bowers says nothing about... (view)
-
01:48RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Test comment. on the article Kyodaisuu/Test: Test reply. (view)
17 November 2020
-
16:57C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/Another hierarchy: I think that q(m,n) is equal to q(m-1,2^{n^m}*(n^m)), so maybe q(n,n)~2^^n and q(0,0,n)~2^^^n (view)
-
14:00
16 November 2020
-
07:24P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I'm afraid that X+2 will not be a successor structure again in that case. > Oh, I almost forgot: m... (view)
-
06:23Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Oh, I almost forgot: maybe it's worth to change also definition of successor structure using Add map... (view)
-
06:15Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > It is quite difficult to make + a map in this context, because then you are forced not to use + as... (view)
-
05:54Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Hey, that's pretty good! I always thought that the climbing method was an under-appreciated way of d... on the article Tetramur/BEAF past tetrational arrays, climbing method - again: > BEAF requires us to interpret every structure as a fine structure whose size is determined by the ... (view)
-
05:38Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Hey, that's pretty good! I always thought that the climbing method was an under-appreciated way of d... on the article Tetramur/BEAF past tetrational arrays, climbing method - again: > The minute you write something like "-1+X", you are no longer following the climbing method. I mus... (view)
-
05:11P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Yes. When you wrote by this way, I understood each thing. Sorry for having been unconfortable. > S... (view)
15 November 2020
-
20:09Licorneuhh (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Ok, so this is pretty interesting, but it is FAR too complex for me (or most people) to understand. ... on the article Licorneuhh/Pehan Notation: Okay, I'll try to extend the basics with other ideas ;) Thanks for your comment, I'll try to make it... (view)
-
16:59Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: And one point else: > Common mystake. You cannot directly use ordinals in the definition. OK, I unde... (view)
-
16:51Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > The + in α+1 and ω+2 is the addition, which is a map but not a formal symbol. Unlike the formal ... (view)
-
15:13P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > And why in definition of FGH using successor ordinals the formulation only on "alpha + 1" is used?... (view)
-
14:30Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > The reason why I used Add is that you should not distinguish + in your way. I will return to this ... (view)
-
06:10
14 November 2020
-
16:13RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(T^T^ω): I don't know if I'm getting dumber or smarter reading this and I don't like that. (view)
13 November 2020
-
17:01RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Licorneuhh/Pehan Notation: Ok, so this is pretty interesting, but it is FAR too complex for me (or most people) to understand. ... (view)
-
14:01Khang2009 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Khang2009/Uncountable fundamental sequence: Maybe this better I thought (view)
12 November 2020
-
23:48P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: By the way, I guess that you have learned how to create a computable notation from old ill-defined n... (view)
-
23:24P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I want it to be Add(X*3,X*2) = X*5, but Add(X*2,X*3) = X*3. I don't know what you're saying. I int... (view)
-
23:06P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I can't tell if this is a joke or if this is actually serious on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(T^T^ω): This reply is actually a joke. (view)
-
23:05P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment You found a lower bound of 2^17+8 for tree(3) in the unordered version of the weak tree function, wh... on the article LittlePeng9: The talk page is the appropriate location, and hence you do not have to delete your comment. Unfortu... (view)
-
18:10Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: About comparison: Define a bijective map M : PE -> OPE, where OPE is set of ordinals up to Gamma_0 (... (view)
-
11:39Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm also working on trying to make a formal definition of BEAF using the climbing method. The detail... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I not only understand your idea, but I have my own "giant" idea. Try to encode extended Veblen's hie... (view)
-
02:40Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I can't tell if this is a joke or if this is actually serious on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(T^T^ω): Everything I post on blog is a joke. (view)
-
00:21GamesFan2000 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(T^T^ω): I can't tell if this is a joke or if this is actually serious (view)
11 November 2020
-
20:05George Albert Lee (talk | contribs) commented on the article LittlePeng9: You found a lower bound of 2^17+8 for tree(3) in the unordered version of the weak tree function, wh... (view)
-
08:52Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I cannot parse this sentence. Do you mean "Throughout this blog post and comments, f and F always ... (view)
-
00:56P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > For any f, F are elements of PE: I cannot parse this sentence. Do you mean "Throughout this blog p... (view)
10 November 2020
-
18:29C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Hyp cos/Attempt of OCF up to Stability: Is there a circular reference between psi, A, and C for a given reflection instance? (view)
-
17:23EricABQ (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm also working on trying to make a formal definition of BEAF using the climbing method. The detail... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Unfortunately, this is not true anymore after epsilon-zero. You will be making big mistakes. For e... (view)
-
14:54Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment I'm also working on trying to make a formal definition of BEAF using the climbing method. The detail... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > There is a natural correspondence between each X-structure and an ordinal. This is as intended in ... (view)
-
12:26Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I recommend not to use + in this context, because the use of the ambiguous + causes a delay of an ... (view)
-
12:23Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > For any f, F are elements of PE: For any f, F are elements of PE <which are not of the kind S + T>... (view)
-
12:22Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: For any f, F are elements of PE: if g and h are both natural numbers, then g + h is the formal strin... (view)
-
11:56Hexirp (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Can we take UNOCF as a simultaneous equation of "ψ" and "f"? Can we prove that the solution does no... on the article P進大好きbot/Historical Background of the Ill-definedness of UNOCF: Thank you. (view)
-
11:20P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > So, 4+5 = 5+4 = 9, X^^X*5 + X^^X*4 = X^^X*9, but I can not add in case of X + 2 or X^^^3 + X^7, so... (view)
-
11:06Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Then in that case, you need to be careful again to clearly distinguish the operator symbol + and t... (view)
-
09:39P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Can we take UNOCF as a simultaneous equation of "ψ" and "f"? Can we prove that the solution does no... on the article P進大好きbot/Historical Background of the Ill-definedness of UNOCF: No. The conditions do not characterise them. You can simply shift f. No. You can make UNOCF arbitrar... (view)
-
09:30P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > All natural numbers and X are on PE. Then in that case, you need to be careful again to clearly di... (view)
-
09:14Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I got your statement. Since 2 wasn't in PE, it was not valid and could not be a substring in more co... (view)
-
08:48Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: So, I think it would be better if I change rule 1 in definition of PE by this way and fix this issue... (view)
-
08:18Hexirp (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Historical Background of the Ill-definedness of UNOCF: Can we take UNOCF as a simultaneous equation of "ψ" and "f"? Can we prove that the solution does no... (view)
-
05:26Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment ... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(M^M^ω): I noticed it while I was doing that. Thanks anyway. (view)
-
04:55PhiExplodalihP (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool, but did you mean S(m,n) = S(S(...(S(S(m-1,n),n)...),n),n) (with n S's) ? or S(S(...(S(... on the article PhiExplodalihP/Super-Growing Hierarchy: Made it so the "n" part is iterated (view)
-
03:34
-
03:08Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment ... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(M^M^ω): Wait, something must be odd. Uhh okay, I forgot [n] because the RHS is the "inserted" thing. (Do you... (view)
9 November 2020
-
22:40P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: If you do not allow 2 or bigger number in PE, X+1+1 automatically means the five-lettered formal str... (view)
-
16:53Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > That is why I said that you need to define X[n] = 1+…+1. And if X[n] = n? What is the difference... (view)
-
12:50P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > What need I do if I want it to be equivalent to X+(1+1) = (X+1)+1? If the second + in the left han... (view)
-
09:04Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > (g+1) [n] = g Oh my... No. This should be g U {n}, where U is the symbol of union. Without this, I... (view)
-
08:15Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Then X+2 is not a successor structure What need I do if I want it to be equivalent to X+(1+1) = (X... (view)
-
07:43P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I can't avoid that + or * is operator symbol and operator simultaneously, but I must cancel out <a... (view)
-
07:16Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > # To define the set of all valid expressions up to pentational arrays. (Partially done: you have n... (view)
-
07:01Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool, but did you mean S(m,n) = S(S(...(S(S(m-1,n),n)...),n),n) (with n S's) ? or S(S(...(S(... on the article PhiExplodalihP/Super-Growing Hierarchy: Or S(0,n,n) = S(S(...(S(S(n,n),n)...),n),n). (view)
-
06:57Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool, but did you mean S(m,n) = S(S(...(S(S(m-1,n),n)...),n),n) (with n S's) ? or S(S(...(S(... on the article PhiExplodalihP/Super-Growing Hierarchy: But S(0,0,n) = S(S(...(S(S(n,n),n)...),n),n) is acceptable. (view)
-
06:54Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool, but did you mean S(m,n) = S(S(...(S(S(m-1,n),n)...),n),n) (with n S's) ? or S(S(...(S(... on the article PhiExplodalihP/Super-Growing Hierarchy: But I think you need to define the sequence S(1,n), S(2,n), etc first, before you can nest them. Oth... (view)
-
06:36Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > You cannot use a single symbol in two distinct meanings in a single context. So, PE is a set of fo... (view)
-
06:35Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool, but did you mean S(m,n) = S(S(...(S(S(m-1,n),n)...),n),n) (with n S's) ? or S(S(...(S(... on the article PhiExplodalihP/Super-Growing Hierarchy: Ok, thanks for clarification. (view)
-
05:40P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: You cannot use a single symbol in two distinct meanings in a single context. It will cause serious a... (view)
-
05:28Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I checked this link but I didn't understand what do you want. (view)
-
05:14
-
05:08P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > This can be fixed by this way: define operators + and * such as: Unfortunately, no. You should not... (view)
-
04:21PhiExplodalihP (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool, but did you mean S(m,n) = S(S(...(S(S(m-1,n),n)...),n),n) (with n S's) ? or S(S(...(S(... on the article PhiExplodalihP/Super-Growing Hierarchy: The latter (view)
-
04:03Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: And I need verify if Rules 2 and 3 are consistent now: (g + 1) [n] = g + 1 [n] = g + 0 = g. Yes, thi... (view)
-
03:05Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > After applying to similar terms: for any structures f, g, h such as max(g, h) < f: f * g + f * h =... (view)
-
02:52Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > By the way, 2 is not a valid expression, and hence X[2] = 2 should be fixed as 1+1 or something li... (view)
-
02:41Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article PhiExplodalihP/Super-Growing Hierarchy: This is cool, but did you mean S(m,n) = S(S(...(S(S(m-1,n),n)...),n),n) (with n S's) ? or S(S(...(S(... (view)
8 November 2020
-
22:47P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: It became better. By the way, 2 is not a valid expression, and hence X[2] = 2 should be fixed as 1+1... (view)
-
16:29Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Oops, the rule 1 has the same mistake as the previous version. So, For non-basic expressions on LPE ... (view)
-
16:25Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I guess that the standardisation of f*0 is intended to be 0. Oops, my mistake. Of course, the stan... (view)
-
14:24P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > And the map is as follows: I guess that the standardisation of f*0 is intended to be 0. One point:... (view)
-
14:00Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: # Define a subset SPE⊂PE of "standard expressions", and a "standardisation map" PE→SPE. I choose... (view)
-
13:10P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > ~ is the smallest equivalence relation that satisfies the above expressions. It is a common mistak... (view)
-
12:26Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > X^0[n] = 1[n] = 0 (empty array) It is not what I intended. So: Define the equivalence relation ~ a... (view)
-
12:12Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Equivalent expressions are defined to have identical rules of expansion and right expressions can ... (view)
-
12:09Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > # To define the set of all valid expressions up to pentational arrays. (Partially done: you have n... (view)
-
07:41P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is Ψ<sup>2</sup><sub>Ξ(ω2)</sub>(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF the first weakly Ma... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: OK. I see. (view)
-
07:37P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: By the way, it is good to put the current version at the body of the blog post in order to avoid the... (view)
-
07:35P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Can you say me what is left to formally define pentational arrays, please? In general, what you ne... (view)
-
07:28C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is Ψ<sup>2</sup><sub>Ξ(ω2)</sub>(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF the first weakly Ma... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: Thanks, I must not have used the correct argument α (view)
-
07:23P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is Ψ<sup>2</sup><sub>Ξ(ω2)</sub>(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF the first weakly Ma... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: Uh, you got the same result on Ψ^2_{Ξ(ω2)}(2) with me now. But I do not think that Ψ^2_{Ξ(ω+1)... (view)
-
07:15P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is Ψ<sup>2</sup><sub>Ξ(ω2)</sub>(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF the first weakly Ma... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: I am sorry if I am wrong, but isn't it just the least weakly Mahlo cardinal Ξ(2)? Please tell me wh... (view)
-
07:15C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is Ψ<sup>2</sup><sub>Ξ(ω2)</sub>(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF the first weakly Ma... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: I thought about it a bit more and I think that Ψ^2_{Ξ(ω2)}(2) is equal to the least weakly Mahlo ... (view)
-
06:38C7X (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Is Ψ<sup>2</sup><sub>Ξ(ω2)</sub>(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF the first weakly Ma... on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: I can't edit the original comment Is Ψ^2_{Ξ(ω2)}(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF equal to the ... (view)
-
06:34C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article P進大好きbot/Cheatsheet on Properties of OCFs: Is Ψ<sup>2</sup><sub>Ξ(ω2)</sub>(2) in Rathjen's weakly compact OCF the first weakly Ma... (view)
7 November 2020
-
21:04RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/Extreme-Growing Hierarchy: Slight problem for this: How would you define this for transfinite n? Like, \(E_0(\omega)\) = 10^\(\... (view)
-
21:00RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Khang2009/Array-growing hierarchy: This is pretty good, better than some of the other hierarchies I've seen in some recent blog posts, ... (view)
-
20:57RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article PhiExplodalihP/Ultra-Growing Hierarchy: This is pretty cool, I guess. It is only marginally better than the Extreme growing hierarchy unfort... (view)
-
17:50Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: So, final version by now: Define space PE as the smallest set such as: 1) 0, 1 and X are in PE, 2) f... (view)
-
17:06Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > OK. And I understand that I am not ready for it as you think. You can skip to reply my comments he... (view)
-
12:53P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I think it is insufficient because I can't define rules for subtraction. OK. And I understand that... (view)
-
11:26Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Sorry for one piece of text not divided by empty lines... I tried to write this with empty lines, bu... (view)
-
11:22Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Maybe no, because you doubt it. I thought that I understood your rules up to X^^^X except for unde... (view)
6 November 2020
-
07:30EricABQ (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I'm also working on trying to make a formal definition of BEAF using the climbing method. The detail... (view)
-
02:35P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Do you seriously understand what is climbing method? Maybe no, because you doubt it. I thought tha... (view)
5 November 2020
-
21:10RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article RickXPEEp0/On the super logarithm and interpolation to real inputs: This was by FAR one of my favorite projects I've done. It's really fun to extend integer functions t... (view)
-
18:37Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > I think that you do not need those conventions, because you can use (X^^X)*X instead of X^{X^X^…... (view)
-
09:12P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > substract Now I get what you meant. It is something like the non-normal form ω^{1+ω} in Wainer h... (view)
4 November 2020
-
07:03Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Could you inform me of the reason why we need -1 in your formulation? The (new or old) rules do no... (view)
-
01:44P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > Yes, it's right. This is the fourth case. But I couldn't formalize this definition. I ask help wit... (view)
-
01:40P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/Observations of YON: I guess that ψ_I WIN! works like the factorial of ψ_I WIN as the notation indecates, but I have no... (view)
3 November 2020
-
16:18Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Or, new (corrected) version: Prime blocks of structure are defined in this recursive way: for any na... (view)
-
16:04Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > But X^(X^^(-1+X)+1) does not satisfy any conditions in definitions 1, 2, and 3 of PE, does it? Yes... (view)
-
12:57P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: > X^(X^^(-1+X)+1) - admissible (after dropping +1 we got X^(X^^(-1+X)) = X^^X, which doesn't use sub... (view)
-
09:17Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: UPD2: I made a fatal mistake in Rule 8. This should be: ((X^)g (h+1)) [n] = (X^)g[n] ((X^) (-g[n]+g)... (view)
-
04:18Plain'N'Simple (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Hey, that's pretty good! I always thought that the climbing method was an under-appreciated way of d... on the article Tetramur/BEAF past tetrational arrays, climbing method - again: This isn't how the climbing method works, though. The whole point of the climbing method, is that th... (view)
-
04:03Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: UPD: The rules 6 and 7 can be excluded from this system, but with one added definition: I define str... (view)
-
03:07Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: I checked them several times. For me, formalization of BEAF by Deedlit11 was much more useful. I mod... (view)
2 November 2020
-
23:33P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: EDIT: × they are it is ○ they are (Somewhy comments cannot be edited.) (view)
-
23:31P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tetramur/Formalization of BEAF: Although they are it is not directly related to BEAF itself, the studies of the climbing method by E... (view)
-
13:08Koteitan (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is a problem due to the system updating. It will be solved if the update will be completed, I exp... on the article 12AbBa/What happened to this wiki: I posted it to fandom community and repoted it to fandom staff via the request form. (view)
1 November 2020
-
22:49RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Ivan Stepanov/Treeillion: Pretty sure this is just a salad number/naïve extension (view)
-
16:41Koteitan (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is a problem due to the system updating. It will be solved if the update will be completed, I exp... on the article 12AbBa/What happened to this wiki: p.s. It was caused on the setting of "source editor" of "editor" in "your preference". it wasn't cau... (view)
-
16:31Koteitan (talk | contribs) replied to the comment It is a problem due to the system updating. It will be solved if the update will be completed, I exp... on the article 12AbBa/What happened to this wiki: The preview button doesn't work when I make a new post with source editor. Not only so, but the post... (view)
31 October 2020
-
07:45Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Maybe \(f_\omega(n)\textrm{↧}n\approx f_{\omega+1}(n)\) on the article Msiajoe74/A9- Up and Down Arrows for Sequential Functions: Thanks for your kind analysis. (view)
-
02:49C7X (talk | contribs) commented on the article Msiajoe74/A9- Up and Down Arrows for Sequential Functions: Maybe \(f_\omega(n)\textrm{↧}n\approx f_{\omega+1}(n)\) (view)
30 October 2020
-
17:07XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Even if you have a valid source in your mind, it is meaningless, because you have not put it into th... on the article Trakaplex/I'm Still Not Getting Answers...: Okay. (view)
28 October 2020
-
21:49Nayuta Ito (talk | contribs) replied to the comment ... on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(M^M^ω): I believe C-array is easier than messing up with I subscripts. (view)
-
16:05RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Should it start with (0)n being n^n instead of n^^n for elegance's sake? on the article XiTetrateiX/Exploding Layer Notation: Yeah, that makes it much more consistent. (view)
-
04:38P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Nayuta Ito/An attempt to well-define OCF as a number notation/Up to ψ(M^M^ω): ... (view)
-
00:25PhiExplodalihP (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Should it start with (0)n being n^n instead of n^^n for elegance's sake? on the article XiTetrateiX/Exploding Layer Notation: Oh (view)
27 October 2020
-
23:00GamesFan2000 (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/Exploding Layer Notation: Should it start with (0)n being n^n instead of n^^n for elegance's sake? (view)
-
21:57Noogai93 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment And then there's Tritarintar, Quadritarintar, Dekotarintar, Hektotarintar, Unintarintar, Bintarin... on the article Denis Maksudov/My system of number names (Fast Growing Series, FGS): Unidelt, Bidelt, Tridelt, Quadridelt, Quintidelt, Sextidelt, Septidelt, Octidelt, Nonidelt, Dekodelt... (view)
26 October 2020
-
14:39Noogai93 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Noogai93/Number section part 1: Trossablossla (view)
24 October 2020
-
07:13GamesFan2000 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Allam948736/3rd interpretation of ordinal hyperoperators: I've randomly stumbled upon this interpretation as well. The logic here seems to be that the exponen... (view)
23 October 2020
-
23:17P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Even if you have a valid source in your mind, it is meaningless, because you have not put it into th... on the article Trakaplex/I'm Still Not Getting Answers...: You can read the original text by the corresponding history page. (view)
-
16:20Tetramur (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Hey, that's pretty good! I always thought that the climbing method was an under-appreciated way of d... on the article Tetramur/BEAF past tetrational arrays, climbing method - again: Thanks for the feedback! I have some pretty cool videos on BEAF. In these videos every structure is ... (view)
-
14:15XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Even if you have a valid source in your mind, it is meaningless, because you have not put it into th... on the article Trakaplex/I'm Still Not Getting Answers...: I am just wondering, does it define the number, or just says it without mentioning the value? (view)
-
11:55P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) replied to the comment If I set a...e all equal to 1, I get f(1,1,1) = 2. Is that right? on the article P進大好きbot/Kyodaisuutan System: Sorry for noticing your comment too late. (The new system of this wikia does not inform me of new co... (view)
-
03:56P進大好きbot (talk | contribs) commented on the article Trakaplex/I'm Still Not Getting Answers...: Even if you have a valid source in your mind, it is meaningless, because you have not put it into th... (view)
22 October 2020
-
19:07UniversePoker000 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment WHY?!?!?! on the article Pi.jayk/Closing the wiki: Edwin & pepe the frog guy (view)
-
16:25RickXPEEp0 (talk | contribs) commented on the article Trakaplex/What will happen if it was a hotejillion degrees: Well, due to how heat is actually just radiation, temperature CAN NOT exceed ~141 Nonilion degrees, ... (view)
-
06:18EricABQ (talk | contribs) commented on the article Tetramur/BEAF past tetrational arrays, climbing method - again: Hey, that's pretty good! I always thought that the climbing method was an under-appreciated way of d... (view)
21 October 2020
-
15:04
-
02:24Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool idea. May be you should define another faster growing Super Ninja Array Notation (SNAN)... on the article XiTetrateiX/Ninja Array Notation: And (a,b,1) = (a,b) So (3,3,3) = (3↑↑3↑3,3↑3,2) = (3↑↑27,27,2) = ((3↑↑27)↑↑2↑2... (view)
-
02:10Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool idea. May be you should define another faster growing Super Ninja Array Notation (SNAN)... on the article XiTetrateiX/Ninja Array Notation: And (a,b,c,d,e) = (a↑↑↑↑b↑↑↑c↑↑e↑d,b↑↑↑c↑↑e↑d,c↑↑e↑d,e↑d,e-1... (view)
-
02:01Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) replied to the comment This is cool idea. May be you should define another faster growing Super Ninja Array Notation (SNAN)... on the article XiTetrateiX/Ninja Array Notation: And (a,b,c,d) = (a↑↑↑b↑↑d↑c,b↑↑d↑c,d↑c,d-1) (view)
-
01:58Msiajoe74 (talk | contribs) commented on the article XiTetrateiX/Ninja Array Notation: This is cool idea. May be you should define another faster growing Super Ninja Array Notation (SNAN)... (view)
20 October 2020
-
19:07XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Several things > (a,b,c,d . . . z,0) = (a,b,c,d . . . z,0) this isn't a rule. I think you meant to r... on the article XiTetrateiX/Ninja Array Notation: But an explanation is, Basically, "x = t?x+1:0" adds 1 to x every tick, or t. x+2 adds 2, x+3 adds 3... (view)
-
19:00XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Several things > (a,b,c,d . . . z,0) = (a,b,c,d . . . z,0) this isn't a rule. I think you meant to r... on the article XiTetrateiX/Ninja Array Notation: Will fix tho (view)
-
19:00XiTetrateiX (talk | contribs) replied to the comment Several things > (a,b,c,d . . . z,0) = (a,b,c,d . . . z,0) this isn't a rule. I think you meant to r... on the article XiTetrateiX/Ninja Array Notation: It uses javascript code, as in nesting it c times. (view)
Retrieved from "https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Special:SocialActivity"
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.