Googology Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Googology Wiki

Long scale question[]

Is 4,379,000,000 pronounced four thousand three hundred seventy-nine million, or four thousand million three hundred seventy-nine million?

Bubby3 (talk) 15:45, April 14, 2017 (UTC)

Definitely not the latter.
It will be either "four thousand three hundred seventy-nine million" or "four milliard three hundred seventy-nine million", depending on whether the country in question uses "milliard" to denote 109 or not. PsiCubed2 (talk) 17:20, April 15, 2017 (UTC)

Jonathan Bowers Announcement[]

Jonathan Bowers (Hedrondude) has deleted his "illion numbers" website —Preceding unsigned comment added by MultiSoul (talkcontribs)

the website still there, to me. How about the others? ARsygo (talk) 11:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I cannot access http://www.polytope.net/hedrondude/home.htm . I am not sure if it is temporal problem or not. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 11:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Conway's illion question[]

Actually... for the 30th to 99th -illion... does Conway coined the illions with the suffix "-allion"? ARsygo (talk) 14:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes. See the tables in the article. Actually Conway made the suffix as "-llion", not "-illion". 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 14:26, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I added an example for clarification. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 14:35, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
You can read Robert's explanation, and if you want to make sure you can buy Conway's book and confirm it. I have the book and confirmed it from the first source. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 14:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
So actually a site which says "trigintillion" as the Conway's name is not a valid source because it does not correctly refer to the citation. A site which just list "trigintillion" without mentioning who conined the number cannot be a source either, because such citation of common name is not valid unless it is a peer-reviewed source. A site which says "trigintillion" as the name coined by Jonathan Bowers name can be a source. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 14:53, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
I see, anyway, I don't have the book actually, is there any alternative for it? ARsygo (talk) 03:41, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I was wrong. In Conway's book, it is written "You can find a name for any zillion from the 10th to the 999th by combining parts from the appropriate columns of the following table, and then replacing the final vowel by "illion":", so "a" is replaced with "illion". I will add description and revert the change. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 07:11, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
So, the correct name of the -illions are actually trigintillion until novemnonagintillion, right? ARsygo (talk) 07:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Yes. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 08:37, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Change title to Conway-Wechsler system[]

As I wrote in this article, the modified Conway-Wechsler system is invalid. Therefore I propose that we change the title of -illion numbers from the modified system to the original Conway-Wechsler system. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 17:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

As sexdecillion and novemdecillion are standard dictionary numbers, we may start changing the title to Conway-Wechler system from tresvigintillion. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 20:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Advertisement