# Extreme Large Numbers **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [February 16, 2011, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534 "2011-02-16T02:58:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![CalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d26b3c/32.png) [@CalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/1 "2011-02-16T02:58:54Z")
Recently I noticed on a Wikipedia page that there’s a number named the “MILL(IN)ILLION.” It’s not named for a “million”-- 10 to the (6th exponent), but rather 10 to the (3003rd exponent). Using the EXPONENT to BASE NAME formula: (n - 3) / 3, ----we get ----- (3003 - 3) / 3 which is simply 3000 / 3 = 1000. I don’t know if 10 to the (6003rd exponent) would be named a "BILL(IN)ILLION, nor 10 to the (9003rd exponent) a “TRILL(IN)ILLION” , etc. If anyone would like to see this, go to [wikipedia.com](http://wikipedia.com) and type “NAMES OF LARGE NUMBERS” in the “search box.” The example of “MILLINILLION” will be near of the bottom of that Wikipedia page. It’s obvious all of these quantities pale in comparison to the GOOGOLPLEX. With something that immense, you’re for the most part, dealing with fantasy, science fiction, spirituality, or metaphysics. * * * LINK TO STAFF REPORT: [How much is a gazillion? - The Straight Dope](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1636/how-much-is-a-gazillion) ---
**Author:** ![TravisFromOR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cc9497/32.png) [@TravisFromOR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisFromOR)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/2 "2011-02-16T05:59:25Z")
Which staff report are you referring to? What’s your point? ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/3 "2011-02-16T12:45:24Z")
Welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board, **CalDude** , we’re glad to have you with us. When you start a thread, it’s helpful to other readers if you provide a link to the staff report (or column) that you’re referring to. Saves searching time, and helps keep us all on the same page. In this case, I _think_ I know what you’re talking about, and I’ve added a link for you. If I’m incorrect, please email me (or REPORT this post with an explanation) and I’ll be glad to adjust. In any case, no biggie, you’ll know for next time. And, as I say, welcome. Glad for the update from Wikipedia, although the trustworthiness of that source is… well, can be dubious. PS - I see that when we moved to the new system, the 10[sup]9[/sup] somehow became “109”, I’ve asked that to be fixed. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/4 "2011-02-16T14:52:11Z")
I’ve never bothered to use names for anything larger than a centillion, myself. But millinillion makes sense in the context. NAME…ZEROES…“SERIES NAME” thousand…3 million…6…1s billion…9 trillion…12 quadrillion…15 quintillion…18 sextillion…21 septillion…24 octillion…27 nonillion…30 decillion…33…10s undecillion…36 duodecillion…39 tredecillion…42 quattuordecillion…45 quintdecillion…48 sexdecillion…51 septemdecillion…54 octodecillion…57 novemdecillion…60 vigintillion…63…20s unvigintillion…66 duovigintillion…69 trevegintillion…72 quattuorvigintillion…75 quintovigintillion…78 sextovigintillion…81 septemvigintillion…84 octovigintillion…87 novemvigintillion…90 trigintillion…93…30s untrigintillion…96 duotrigintillion…99 ten duotrigintillion.100 \<------------------also called the “googol” trevigintillion…102 etc to\>\>\> quadragintillion…123…40s quinquagintillion…153…50s sexagintillion…183…60s septuagintillion…213…70s octogintillion…243…80s nonagintillion…273…90s centillion…303…100s ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/5 "2011-02-16T17:36:42Z")
I’m pretty embarrassed by the writing, but I think I should link to my old thread [on large numbers](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=149305) here. The short version is that if you can write down the number of digits, it’s just not that large. ---
**Author:** ![Nunzio\_Tavulari](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Nunzio\_Tavulari](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nunzio_Tavulari)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/6 "2011-02-16T18:01:00Z")
I’m disappointed that they’ve worked out the names for all these huge numbers but still haven’t gotten to zillion, jillion, bazillion and gazillion. What are they waiting for? There doesn’t seem to be much practical use for numbers with more than 303 zeroes. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/7 "2011-02-16T18:10:40Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m pretty embarrassed by the writing, but I think I should link to my old thread on large numbers here. The short version is that if you can write down the number of digits, it’s just not that large. In fact, if you can express it in any amount of space, using any sort of notation whatsoever, it’s just not that large. The vast majority of numbers are far larger than that. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/8 "2011-02-16T18:58:32Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > In fact, if you can express it in any amount of space, using any sort of notation whatsoever, it’s just not that large. The vast majority of numbers are far larger than that. Prove it! Just give me one example of a number that’s larger than that. If you can’t give me any examples, then I refuse to believe that “The vast majority of numbers are far larger than that.” ---
**Author:** ![Jake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jake)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/9 "2011-02-16T19:27:10Z")
> [@Nunzio\_Tavulari](#): > > I’m disappointed that they’ve worked out the names for all these huge numbers but still haven’t gotten to zillion, jillion, bazillion and gazillion. > > What are they waiting for? There doesn’t seem to be much practical use for numbers with more than 303 zeroes. Don’t forget “Trumptillion” ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/10 "2011-02-16T20:57:46Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > Prove it! Just give me one example of a number that’s larger than that. If you can’t give me any examples, then I refuse to believe that “The vast majority of numbers are far larger than that.” Can’t give an example (obviously), but it’s trivially true for positive integers - for any such number you can give, there’s a finite amount of smaller numbers, but an infinite number of larger ones. It’s also true, although slightly less trivially, for other sets of numbers. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [February 16, 2011, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/11 "2011-02-16T23:28:09Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Can’t give an example (obviously), but it’s trivially true for positive integers - for any such number you can give, there’s a finite amount of smaller numbers, but an infinite number of larger ones. It’s also true, although slightly less trivially, for other sets of numbers. Whoosh! ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2011, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/12 "2011-02-17T19:41:28Z")
> [@Nunzio\_Tavulari](#): > > I’m disappointed that they’ve worked out the names for all these huge numbers but still haven’t gotten to zillion, jillion, bazillion and gazillion. What’s a Brazil(in)ian? ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2011, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/13 "2011-02-17T23:48:07Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > Prove it! Just give me one example of a number that’s larger than that. Sure: “The smallest number at least an order of magnitude larger than the current largest number humans have developed a notation system capable of notating explicitly using all of the mass in the universe.” (I believe it’s in the vicinity of the smallest thoroughly boring number.) ---
**Author:** ![Nametag](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nametag/32/406_2.png) [@Nametag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nametag)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2011, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/14 "2011-02-21T01:57:30Z")
> [@RM\_Mentock](#): > > What’s a Brazil(in)ian? A Brazilin’ Ian is a muggins-ish British writer who gets all of his pubic hair removed by waxing. ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2011, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/15 "2011-02-21T20:02:05Z")
No… that’s not it… ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/16 "2011-06-12T07:23:14Z")
> [@Nunzio\_Tavulari](#): > > I’m disappointed that they’ve worked out the names for all these huge numbers but still haven’t gotten to zillion, jillion, bazillion and gazillion. I don’t know about the others but Jillion starred in “It’s A Living” in the early 80s 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 9:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/17 "2011-06-12T09:14:18Z")
As long as this thing got bumped… When the column was converted to HTML or whatever for Web display, the coding for superscripts fell out. The text therfore reads (in relevant part) > [@](#): > > there’s already disagreement about what the word “billion” means. In the United States, it means 109; in Great Britain, it means 1012. instead of saying “it means 10[sup]9[/sup]” and “it means 10[sup]12[/sup]” respectively. There are several other places in that column where an intended 10[sup]nn[/sup] notation became 10nn. ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/18 "2011-06-12T18:14:49Z")
The column is somewhat out of date, though, in that most British and Commonwealth authorities threw in the towel and converted to the American use some time ago. “Long scale billion” is now the preferred term for what used to be called “British billion”, _etc._, and “short scale” is the (mostly unnecessary) term for what used to be called “American”. ---
**Author:** ![Indistinguishable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/90ced4/32.png) [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/19 "2011-06-12T19:06:04Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > In fact, if you can express it in any amount of space, using any sort of notation whatsoever, it’s just not that large. The vast majority of numbers are far larger than that. I don’t know what is meant by this claim… “Any amount of space, using any sort of notation whatsoever”? Surely, everything can be expressed in some amount of space in some system of notation (indeed, you can always consider notation systems contrived to “express” that particular thing in pretty much no space at all). ETA: I suppose what’s meant is “For every fixed system of notation, the vast majority of numbers are not expressible in human-feasible length in that system of notation”. Note, though, that this is different from “The vast majority of numbers are such that, for every system of notation, they are not expressible in human-feasible length in that system”… ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2011, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534/20 "2011-06-12T19:29:42Z")
The vast majority of numbers are not expressible at all, with any notation system. The set of real numbers is uncountably infinite, remember, so between any two numbers are an infinite amount of numbers, an infinite amount of which will not be expressible. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/extreme-large-numbers/571534.md?page=2)