Googology Wiki
Googology Wiki

Hey there, welcome to the wiki! Glad to see some foreign-language googologisms. FB100Ztalkcontribs 17:42, June 4, 2013 (UTC)


Edit rate

You edit rate might surpass the current fastest editor. Jiawhien! 10:11, June 8, 2013 (UTC)

No worries, I'm still active. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 10:23, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
That's true. But my edit rate is 210/5 = 42, while Ikosarakt's is 15575/374 = 41,6. Wythagoras (talk) 10:27, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
You are the new user, therefore it will be inaccurate. So we shall compare two of you in a month later.  Jiawhien! 11:19, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
@Ikosarakt1, I hope so.  Jiawhien! 11:23, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
Current edit rates:
1. Wythagoras 55
2. Ikosarakt1   43
3. Jiawheinalt  41
Wythagoras (talk) 18:47, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

But remember: while you're at school or work, I'm still online and can edit. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 19:19, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

While I'm at school, I visit this wiki during breaks to see wazzup. LittlePeng9 (talk) 19:47, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
From phone? (By the way, I haven't such phone that can connect Internet). Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 19:51, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, indeed. I got such phone recently. Or during Computer Science lessons. LittlePeng9 (talk) 20:19, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
But I got soon 7 weeks holiday. :-) So my edit rate will grow again Wythagoras (talk) 05:12, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
So fast. Jiawheein (talk) 06:27, June 15, 2013 (UTC)
New edit rates:
Wythagoras 64
Ikosarakt 43

Wythagoras (talk) 16:17, June 15, 2013 (UTC)

You challenge me? Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 17:33, June 15, 2013 (UTC)

I hope so, and the 64, per what? Jiawheein (talk) 02:58, June 16, 2013 (UTC)

I shall not succumb. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 07:44, June 16, 2013 (UTC)

Oh my God, within 2 weeks you have far more edits than I got within half a year! LittlePeng9 (talk) 13:04, June 17, 2013 (UTC)

Suprised by my current edits rate? IAmJiawhein (talk) 12:59, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

It's a lot harder to keep this rate for a lot of months. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 13:27, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Edit rates July 14:

Wythagoras 48 , 44 days active

Ikosarakt 45 , 414 days active Wythagoras (talk) 17:26, June 27, 2013 (UTC)

Soon my account will be 400 days old! Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 16:28, June 26, 2013 (UTC)

Wow, after a bit over month you are second on this wiki! Good luck with surpassing Ikosarakt! LittlePeng9 (talk) 17:27, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

There were two guys who seriously tried to surpass me: Googleaarex and Jiawhein, but both eventually got succumb. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 18:52, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, I think Wythagoras will also fail with this. But he really did incredibly job by surpassing everyone expect you (and FB100Z if you don't cout tie)! LittlePeng9 (talk) 18:59, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

If not a secret, why you think so? Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 19:12, July 7, 2013 (UTC)

Well, Jiawhein has 2890 points, so he is still above me. FB100Z has another account with 1800 edits, so his points ar broken in half. (I believe he should have 2190 points or so) So I'm actually 4th... Wythagoras (talk) 06:05, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

You two have over ten thousand edits and there are only three thousand pages!!!

Why are there so many edits!!!D57799 (talk) 10:09, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

Well, many pages have undergone tens of edits, for example creation of the page, adding approximate values, adding more approximate values, correcting approximate values... LittlePeng9 (talk) 10:16, October 5, 2014 (UTC)
Plus the fact that of these 11,500 edits there are only 8,000 on articles. And I've edited only 2,500 different pages. I've made also 2,000 edits on my blog and my namespace, plus 500 comments, plus some other edits. (see Wythagoras (talk) 12:04, October 5, 2014 (UTC)


I think... DO you live in Netherlands??????????????????????//? Jiawhien (talk) 12:44, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

why do you think that?Wythagoras (talk) 11:05, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

Because your username looks like dosen't look like usa register name. 11:14, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
For me it looks like Pythagoras with W instead of P. He can be from anywhere in the world with such name. LittlePeng9 (talk) 12:43, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

Of the active users on this wiki, there's at least one each from Netherlands, Poland, Singapore, South Korea, Russia, UK, and US. The English-speaking googology community is far more diverse than I ever suspected! (Bird is UK; Jabe, Munafo, and Saibian are US.) FB100Ztalkcontribs 20:34, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

Who is in South Korea? JiawheinGoogol (talk) 06:01, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
Find him/her for yourself. -- I want more clouds! 06:52, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
you in South Korea? JiawheinGoogol (talk) 06:58, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
Yes. -- I want more clouds! 07:25, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
I though that you live in sg too. And kim jong un sucks. JiawheinGoogol (talk) 09:42, June 19, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, i am 99% sure you live in netherlands because that c uses dutches. Jiawheein (talk) 02:27, June 16, 2013 (UTC)

@FB100Z, how u no that SS in usa? Jiawheein (talk) 12:49, June 17, 2013 (UTC)
Magic stalking skills. FB100Ztalkcontribs 00:24, June 19, 2013 (UTC)
which page shows the locations of SS? Or google plus? JiawheinGoogol (talk) 06:01, June 19, 2013 (UTC) {}

Destruxul pages

Great work filling in all the destruxul pages, but (I'm not sure if this is you or not) some of them aren't showing up on the template due to differences in capital letters. I think we should try and keep it consistent, and all the other templates use capitals on all of the words in the name. Thanks. DrCeasium (talk) 07:58, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

I copied and paste the template form the destruxul page, beacause I tought it was a good template. Also, can anyone make a extremexul template? Wythagoras (talk) 08:15, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

Visual images

Do you think that you can make the meameamealokkapoowa visual represention? JiawheinGoogol (talk) 08:35, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

Your uploaded images looks nice and neat. Can tell us that how you drew the images that you uploaded? JiawheinGoogol (talk) 01:20, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

I've made the pictures with Photoshop, exepted for a few. Just use the text tool.  About the meameamealokkapoowa visual, I'm going to try, but with &'s is it impossible. Wythagoras (talk) 05:34, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

In Godgahlah, the equalation is so simple but yet you still put the visual represention. JiawheinGoogol (talk) 12:40, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

That's true, but I've made it for the other visual representation. Wythagoras (talk) 12:43, June 24, 2013 (UTC)

Hierarchy of functions: Wythagoras (talk) 07:15, June 30, 2013 (UTC)

Hierarchy of functions

Can you please make more readable variant? Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 08:09, June 30, 2013 (UTC)

It is readable, if you go to the page of the image itself and zoom in. Wythagoras (talk) 09:40, June 30, 2013 (UTC) JiawhienIsBackNoEvadeBlockOnceAgainIComeBack (talk) 07:55, November 17, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, but why you wrote "addation" and "tretation"? Also, you wrote "Linear Array Notation" twice, supposed to mean both Bowers' and Hollom's variants. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 19:06, June 30, 2013 (UTC)

"addation" and "tretation" might be a typo. Also, "Linear Array Notation" meant both Bowers' and Wythagoras' (Dollar function) variants, not Hollom's. It says "Linear Hyperfactorial Array Notation" for Hollom's one. -- I want more clouds! 02:50, July 1, 2013 (UTC)
fixed! Wythagoras (talk) 06:14, July 1, 2013 (UTC)
Also, "tretationele arrays" doesn't looks good. Ikosarakt1 (talk ^ contribs) 09:32, July 1, 2013 (UTC)

I made my Array-Type Array Notation. It a parent of Nested Array Notation and Tetrational Arrays. Click here:Beyond Nested Array Notation I - MyBEAF —Preceding unsigned comment added by Googleaarex (talkcontribs)

Can you make tritri, tripent, supertet or superpent visual represention, please? please? please? AarexTiao

I gave you rollback and chatmod privileges. FB100Ztalkcontribs 20:44, September 22, 2013 (UTC)

Make a throogol and thrangol visual represention. AarexTiao 01:29, November 7, 2013 (UTC)


Congratulations for becoming the chat moderator. JiawhienIsBackNoEvadeBlockOnceAgainIComeBack (talk) 07:51, November 17, 2013 (UTC)

Dollar Function

[[0],1] has growth rate \(\psi_I(0)\)

But [0,1] has growth rate \(\omega\). Fix it!

Also I made hyper-dimensional array notation idea. AarexTiao 17:28, December 14, 2013 (UTC)

Wait, here an better idea! AarexTiao 22:23, January 15, 2014 (UTC)

I'm quite sure that there's a problem I pointed out here. a$[[[0,1],1]] has level \(\psi(\psi_I(\psi(\psi_I(0))))\), not \(\psi(\psi_I(\psi_I(0)))\). Please fix it. {hyp/^,cos} (talk) 05:21, November 3, 2014 (UTC)

When will you finish Dollar function? 12AbBa (talk) 10:00, March 24, 2017 (UTC)

Wow! Your dollar function grows faster than BAN! \(a\$[ [0]_{[0]_2}]\) is the tip of BAN! 12AbBa (talk) 11:58, March 24, 2017 (UTC)


Can you explain a little more why \(\vartheta(\Omega_\omega) \neq L\)? FB100Ztalkcontribs 02:00, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, \(\vartheta(\Omega_\omega) = L\). The real problem is at the comparison of \(2L\), \(XL\), \(L^2\) and so on with FGH. The comparisons doesn't match the ones given here and here. This means that you can't simply swap out L with \(\vartheta(\Omega_\omega)\). -- ☁ I want more clouds! ⛅ 03:10, December 16, 2013 (UTC)
I'm skeptical for a bunch of reasons. Hyp cos hasn't supplied any proofs (yep, that's what I'm obsessed with now), and I'm not fully convinced that his/her work is applicable. But then again, I made many unproven claims on the Intro to BEAF article. I propose to remove them. FB100Ztalkcontribs 03:56, December 16, 2013 (UTC)
The reason is that \(L^2 = \{L,2\} = \{n,n//2\}\), by Bowers's definition. Wythagoras (talk) 06:30, December 16, 2013 (UTC)
Rule condition: no pilot - result: b^p doesn't seem to apply in legiattic arrays. On this condition we need some complex rule, and the same as L-arrays. hyp$hyp?cos&cos (talk) 03:31, January 11, 2014 (UTC)


Can you explain what's structure function? I can't find the definition anywhere. hyp$hyp?cos&cos (talk) 03:36, January 11, 2014 (UTC)

It is this: \(\Omega\), \(I\), \(M\), \(\Xi(3,0)\), etc. are the ordinals in the first row.
In the second row are the K, \(\Xi_2(1,0)\) , \(\Xi_2(2,0)\), etc.
Similiar for the third row. Then the first ordinal in the second plane diagonalizes over the number of rows. The first ordinal in the second cube diagonalizes over the number of planes, until we get to the n-dimension. The ordinal in the second n-dimension diagonalizes over the 'n' in the first n-dimension. We can also get rows of n-dimension, the nth ndimension is already at level T(n). For the structure function, we order the structures as in BEAF, for example, a row of n-dimension is \(\omega^{\omega+1}\)
Attempt to definition
\(X(\alpha) = X(\alpha)[k]\)
\(X(\alpha+1)\) diagonalizes over \(X(\alpha)\) like K diagonalizes over \(\Xi(\omega,0)\)
\(X(\alpha+k+1)\) diagonalizes over \(X(\alpha+1)\) like I diagonalizes over \(\Omega\)
Wythagoras (talk) 06:50, January 11, 2014 (UTC)


What's with the name? King(2 [2] 18){0} (talk) 13:42, February 19, 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean my user name? It's from Pythagoras. Wythagoras (talk) 16:53, February 19, 2014 (UTC)
I mean the W :P King(2 [2] 18){0} (talk) 14:58, February 21, 2014 (UTC)
I don't know, it just sounds good. Also, where is your name from? Wythagoras (talk) 11:20, February 22, 2014 (UTC)
Well, my real name is King Arthur and I forgot where I got the 2218 part. King(2 [2] 18){0} (talk) 17:31, February 28, 2014 (UTC)


you are now sysop FB100Ztalkcontribs 02:10, March 10, 2014 (UTC)

Pictures for large numbers

Several of the pictures you recently uploaded can expressed as a table. I have created the Logue template. I put it on the Ogdatalogue page. Compare the version with your picture of the number with the version that uses the table.

I think this table can handle Octalogue through Entatalogue, and might also work for Grangol and Grangolplex. A modified version could be created to handle other numbers like Googolyottaplex. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 20:01, March 23, 2014 (UTC)

Looks like someone's already implementing it on the pages. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 20:04, March 23, 2014 (UTC)
Okay, it looks actually better and it saves me a lot of work for future numbers – if we can create it for numbers such as Googolplexidex and then expand to Googolduplexidex and so on.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wythagoras (talkcontribs)

Ordinal collapsing function

As you just left so suddenly from chat, I didn't have a chance to answer you: I don't know much about ordinal collapsing functions, but I know Veblen function quite well. LittlePeng9 (talk) 19:28, May 5, 2014 (UTC)


You suddenly left chat (again), so I have to say it here: LittlePeng9 (talk) 08:14, May 18, 2014 (UTC)

view restore

you don't have to undelete pages to view them. click on "view/restore", scroll to the bottom and you can see the version history and check out the revisions you'! 15:51, June 8, 2014 (UTC)

He probably restored it because MathJax doesn't work when viewing deleted revisions. -- ☁ I want more clouds! ⛅ 23:06, June 8, 2014 (UTC)
Or maybe he wanted to view the comments of the blog post. -- ☁ I want more clouds! ⛅ 01:41, June 9, 2014 (UTC)
No, I restored it accidentally. Wythagoras (talk) 09:08, June 9, 2014 (UTC)
well that explains it you'! 14:45, June 9, 2014 (UTC)


About your edit on my TM page, I don't mind machine you made being there, but you can give yourself some credit :) I'm using mobile, so I'm unable to edit such long page, so I leave decision up to you. LittlePeng9 (talk) 07:39, August 9, 2014 (UTC)


On the list of googological functions you mention that TREE(n) > f_theta(W^w*w)(n). How did you obtain this result? Sbiis Saibian (talk) 10:01, August 19, 2014 (UTC)

As far as I know, best bound is SVO+w^w, due to Deedlit. I'd really love to see the derivation of theta(W^w*w)! LittlePeng9 (talk) 11:34, August 19, 2014 (UTC)

I found one way to order the labeled trees up to \(\vartheta(\Omega^\omega\omega)\), but probably it's not the winning sequence (maybe the winning sequence has an ordinal level much higher than that), so I get \(TREE(n)\geq f_{\vartheta(\Omega^\omega\omega)}(n)\). See here for more details. hyp$hyp?cos&cos (talk) 14:53, August 19, 2014 (UTC)

@LittlePeng the bound Deedlit gave is H_(SVO*w^w), which is comparable to f_(SVO+w).
@Hyp cos, just to nitpick, it technically incorrect to say that \(TREE(n)\geq f_{\vartheta(\Omega^\omega\omega)}(n)\). What you wanted to say is that \(f_{\vartheta(\Omega^\omega\omega)}(n) = o(TREE(n))\) Wythagoras (talk) 15:38, August 19, 2014 (UTC)
I don't think this is how small o notation works. LittlePeng9 (talk) 15:47, August 19, 2014 (UTC)
I swapped order *facepalm*. But what I just wrote (after update) is correct. Basically, it says that \(lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{f_{\vartheta(\Omega^\omega\omega)}(n)}{TREE(n)} = 0\) Wythagoras (talk) 15:53, August 19, 2014 (UTC)
How are you sure limit isn't positive? LittlePeng9 (talk) 16:35, August 19, 2014 (UTC)
We don't have formal proof, but it is very likely. Wythagoras (talk) 18:58, August 19, 2014 (UTC) (Basically, \(lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{F_{\vartheta(\Omega^\omega\omega)}(n-3)}{TREE(n)} = 0\) with the right definition of F is easy to proof using Hyp Cos' results. Wythagoras (talk) 19:00, August 19, 2014 (UTC))
The second limit you wrote is correct, but I would guess that the first limit you wrote probably isn't. Deedlit11 (talk) 02:42, August 24, 2014 (UTC)
If the first limit is incorrect, then the sequences Hyp Cos found are the best. Wythagoras (talk) 05:37, August 24, 2014 (UTC)

Rotlink edits (into bot edits)

Cross-post from my user talk page:

If you continue to rollback, try this link: When you rollback on that page, it marks the rolled back edit and your rollback as bot edits, preventing the clutter on recent changes. -- ☁ I want more clouds! ⛅ 13:26, August 29, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I shall do that if it is later needed. Wythagoras (talk) 17:38, August 29, 2014 (UTC)


I only recently learned of your technical difficulties with the IRC. I'm sorry to hear about them, it must be frustrating!

I may be able to construct a proxy that relays data between IRC and Wikia Chat via PMs to and from a special bot. It won't be the cleanest solution -- it'll be subject to serious network lag, and you'll lose connection if I ever experience a power outage or someone trips on my server's ethernet cable, but it just might work. it's vel time

That would be great. (I always see having you guys fun, like Peng killing Deedlit). But don't expect to much activity form me - I'm currently busy with other things. Wythagoras (talk) 15:23, September 24, 2014 (UTC)


Why are you saying megafugagargantugoogolplex isn't the biggest number? (unsigned comment by Vilius2001)

here made it a separate section. anyway, because googologists have named FAR bigger numbers - even Graham's number which isn't very big by large number standards is much larger than this. If you want to know what the current largest named number is, it's BIG FOOT. Cookiefonster (talk) 17:10, December 16, 2014 (UTC)

Where did you get this definition anyway. The problem is that people use gargoogolplex for both 10^10^10^100, 10^10^200 and 10^(2*10^100)? Also, mega-n should be always n^^n, I think... Wythagoras (talk) 17:17, December 16, 2014 (UTC)

The author of the webpage it came from clearly meant googoltriplex^^googoltriplex, so I changed it to that. Cookiefonster (talk) 17:18, December 16, 2014 (UTC)

Can you prove \(\Sigma(18)>\text{Graham's number}\)? 12AbBa (talk) 12:07, March 24, 2017 (UTC)

For Googological Olympiad

Please send me your email address. My email address is [removed]. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 08:10, January 29, 2015 (UTC)

Email sent. Wythagoras (talk) 16:05, January 29, 2015 (UTC)
Email replied. 🐟 Fish fish fish ... 🐠 06:00, January 30, 2015 (UTC)


Thank you for your interests! Antares.I.G.Harrison (talk) 13:13, February 7, 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for improving my notation page!

UAN under construction 12:22, February 8, 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. The Square symbol on Talk:BEAF is the symbol promised on theIntroduction to BEAF. n Square m is n&n&n&...&n (m)

Just like you said, this is {L,1}n,m or {n,m/2}

Okay. I shall point that out in the intro. (btw, you can answer in Talk:BEAF itself) Wythagoras (talk) 16:30, February 16, 2015 (UTC)


The Buchholz hydra article says that you proved that \(\text{BH}(3) < f_{\varepsilon_0}(4)\). Where can I find the proof? -- vel! 20:33, April 9, 2015 (UTC)

Wyth's informal justification of the bound, which is I believe all we've got. LittlePeng9 (talk) 11:11, April 10, 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm, I don't agree with some of Wythagoras's analysis. For example, he has (0(1)(0(0(0)))) corresponding to the ordinal \(\omega^2\) in the fast-growing hierarchy. But (0(0(0(0)))) already corresponds to the ordinal \(\omega^{\omega^\omega}\), so the length of termination will exceed \(f_{\omega^\omega}(n)\). However,the height of the hydras never exceeds six for BH(3), so it shouldn't be too hard to show that \(\text{BH}(3) < f_{\varepsilon_0}(5)\) with a little work. Deedlit11 (talk) 13:47, April 10, 2015 (UTC)
I've changed the wording of the article to better reflect the roughness of the result. Hope we can get this rigorously proven at some point. -- vel! 16:47, April 10, 2015 (UTC)
Oops. Wythagoras (talk) 06:34, April 11, 2015 (UTC)

Also, where is the proof bounding \(\Sigma(7)\) as seen on the Rado's sigma function article? -- vel! 00:19, April 16, 2015 (UTC)

Here it is. -- ☁ I want more clouds! ⛅ 03:27, April 16, 2015 (UTC)

WaxPlanck (talk) 13:33, December 13, 2017 (UTC) How do you use the ask state on BB2(n)?

WaxPlanck (talk) 14:05, December 29, 2017 (UTC) Can you publish your ask state for the second order BB function?

Add this image: File:Googolxennaplex.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by UniversePoker777 (talkcontribs) 15:20, October 17, 2018

Where are you

Please come back DrCocktor (talk) 15:19, March 28, 2019 (UTC)