Add new comment
-
Want facts and want them fast? Our Maths in a minute series explores key mathematical concepts in just a few words.
What do chocolate and mayonnaise have in common? It's maths! Find out how in this podcast featuring engineer Valerie Pinfield.
Is it possible to write unique music with the limited quantity of notes and chords available? We ask musician Oli Freke!
How can maths help to understand the Southern Ocean, a vital component of the Earth's climate system?
Was the mathematical modelling projecting the course of the pandemic too pessimistic, or were the projections justified? Matt Keeling tells our colleagues from SBIDER about the COVID models that fed into public policy.
PhD student Daniel Kreuter tells us about his work on the BloodCounts! project, which uses maths to make optimal use of the billions of blood tests performed every year around the globe.
4 x 3 = 4 + 4 + 4
4 ^ 3 = 4 x 4 x 4
4 ^^ 3 = 4 ^ 4 ^ 4
4 ^^^ 3 = 4 ^^ 4 ^^ 4
4 ^^^^ 3 = 4 ^^^ 4 ^^^ 4
They all follow the same pattern. For up arrows, you just have one less up arrow than in the original problem.
You are correct that
3 ^^ 4 = 3 ^ 3 ^ 3 ^ 3
However,
3 ^^^^ 3
is actually = 3 ^^^ (3 ^^^ 3)
Working on the parentheses first, you'd find that (3 ^^^ 3) = 3 ^^ (3 ^^ 3)
Again, working on the parentheses, (3 ^^ 3) = 3 ^ 3 ^ 3 = ~7.6 trillion. Put that back in your other problem
and you've got 3 ^^ (~ 7.6 trillion), which means you're doing 3 ^ 3 ^ 3 ^ 3... until you've done it 7.6 trillion times.
Once you get that crazy huge number, you'd put it back in the original problem:
3 ^^^ (crazy huge number).
Which is 3 ^^ 3 ^^ 3 ^^ 3... until you've done it a crazy huge number of times. Unimaginably big. And that's only with only 4 up arrows.