Mathematics desk
< November 16	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 18 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 17[edit]

Graham's number[edit]

At Talk:Graham's number many users have the habit of wanting to know what the first 10 digits of Graham's number are. Why do they keep asking this question?? Georgia guy (talk) 12:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because they want to know what it is? --Jayron 32 12:53, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I just went through Talk:Graham's number and the archives of that talk page. Near as I can tell, we have had approximately... let me check the math on this... carry the 1... um... two. Yeah, two people have asked about this: One in 2008, and one today. Twice in 14 years is a very liberal definition of "many". --Jayron 32 12:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I count three such questions: Talk:Graham's number/Archive 1 § Digits, Talk:Graham's number/Archive 2 § Leading digits of Graham's number, and Talk:Graham's number § The ten leftmost digits of Graham’s number. --Lambiam 16:10, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm sure there will be more as times goes by. Georgia guy (talk) 16:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An easy way not to invite such questions is by removing the lengthy section Rightmost decimal digits, which is unrelated to the reason why Graham's number is considered notable and not properly sourced to reliable sources. --Lambiam 17:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3 times in more than a decade and a half is still not enough to qualify for "keeps happening". It's literally not a thing. Not enough people are asking the question to believe it to be a common occurrence. If it were showing up a few times per year, you may have something. But no, this is not an event that can be accurately described as a "many users" having "a habit". It literally isn't. The OP has no basis for their question. --Jayron 32

Nevertheless, the same question can be asked for any such unfathomable humungosity, such as SSCG(3) or

a 6

, the exponential factorial of 6, and then is not only equally unanswerable, but also equally unrelated to any reason for the number being notable as are the statements about the final digits. Arguments for removal of the latter include WP:UNDUE and WP:NOR. --Lambiam 15:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The OP didn't ask that. They asked us to interpret the motivations of three people, asking three coincidentally similar questions over the course of over a decade, as to why they did what they did. Even if the presumption that this was a frequent occurrence was correct, are you and the OP honestly arguing that we can find references to support any answer to the question "Why do they keep asking this question??" Really? --Jayron 32 16:35, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know that the first sentence in the posting that started this thread, not a question but a statement, was hyperbole. Three is more than two, yet is not "many", and I think not even one of these three users has made a habit of asking for the first digits. The actual question that follows is perfectly interpretable, though, regardless of whether you take this statement at its face value or disregard the exaggeration: "Why is it that some people want to see the first few digits displayed in the article?" While I don't know the answer to this specific question, there is no doubt their joint wish is triggered by the (IMO irrelevant) display of last umpteen digits. --Lambiam 17:16, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's wonderful you're able to read minds and reach back into the past to understand the motivations of random people you've never met. You should probably put that skill to better use than answering questions on the reference desk. --Jayron 32 18:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All three first refer explicitly to the listing of the last few digits, and then proceed to ask for the same for the first digits. One doesn't need to have paranormal psychic powers to detect a connection. --Lambiam 19:16, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The question seems irrelevant. You can't write down the number in any ordinary notation, so it makes no difference what the start of it would be if you made the attempt. I guess the main reason a person would ask is that the last few digits are included in the article. This seems equally irrelevant but much easier to compute. --RDBury (talk) 16:55, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "relevant" to what, exactly? If someone did have a way of computing the first few digits, or even the first digit in some base that's not a power of 3, I for one would be interested to know about it. Probably I'd be more interested in the method than the actual digits. But there are all sorts of very interesting questions in mathematics where it's hard to explain what "difference" the answer makes in an everyday sense. --Trovatore (talk) 09:09, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On reflection, I can answer some of those myself. The first digit is 1 in base 2, and also in any base greater than half of Graham's number but less than Graham's number itself. The first digit in any base greater than Graham's number is Graham's number. Please accept my tacit rephrasing to avoid those trivial cases. --Trovatore (talk) 09:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC) [reply]

It's a matter of opinion, so I won't argue the point. --RDBury (talk) 03:41, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]