6 ms·
What's funny is that after demonstrating the loop you still have to give a concrete number of times that you repeat it. You can't deal infinite damage, but you
by jacksontheel 3y ago
What's funny is that after demonstrating the loop you still have to give a concrete number of times that you repeat it. You can't deal infinite damage, but you sure can do a googolplex damage.
- A_D_E_P_T 3y agoWhy go for such a small number? Raise Graham's Number to the power of itself -- at the very least. https://research.phys.cmu.edu/biophysics/2021/01/09/nobody-comprehends-grahams-number https://research.phys.cmu.edu/biophysics/2021/01/09/nobody-c... I'm sure it can be entertaining to try and deal the largest possible finite amount of damage, which requires finding uncommonly large numbers.
- tromp 3y agoRaising Google's Number to itself doesn't make it appreciably bigger. Instead you can pick TREE(3), or SCG(13), or Loader's Number which is about the largest famous one we know how to compute. Beyond that there's the likes of Busy Beaver numbers and beyond that is Rayo's number. Btw, Graham's Number is less than BB(49 bits) [1]. [1] https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/6430/shortest-terminating-program-whose-output-size-exceeds-grahams-number/263884#263884 https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/6430/shortest-t...