113 = 112 + 4/4.
No.
So do I just misunderstand the term numberline?
I think the OP meant the set of natural numbers.
Thanks.
So can the 4x4 rule generate all rational munbers between 0 and 1?
6 = 4 + (4+4)/4
The upper bound is 4[sup]4[sup]4[sup]4[/sup][/sup][/sup], but that’s probably cheating.
Given that there’s an infinite number of rational numbers between 0 and 1, and only a finite number of operations that can be performed on 4 fours, I don’t see how.
Wouldn’t that be 4![sup]4![sup]4![sup]4![/sup][/sup][/sup]?
How do you define 4 without 1, 2, and 3?
I don’t think the factorial operator is legal. 4! = 432*1 but you are not allowed to use these other numbers.
Oops.
Anyway, the exponential operation is probably also illegal, because 4[sup]4[/sup] is 444*4, and you are only allowed to use four 4’s.
If you’re going to look at it that way, 4*4 is illegal too, since it boils down to 4+4+4+4. to my mind, as long as only 4 fours appear in the expression, it’s fine, regardless of what the operation symbolics represent.
That’s true, though multiplication is taken as elementary for the most part.
“Cheat”? What is this “cheat”? If we’re gonna go big, let’s go big all the way.
Let me introduce tetration: [sup]4[/sup]4. You fans of Rudy Rucker may recognise this: it’s described in his “Infinity and the Mind” .
The expression [sup]4[/sup]4 means the same as Urban Ranger’s 4[sup]4[sup]4[sup]4[/sup][/sup][/sup]. It means “four exponentiated upon itself, four times”.
So… 4[sup]4[/sup] = 4 * 4 * 4 * 4 = 256.
4[sup]4[sup]4[/sup][/sup] = 4sup[/sup] = 4[sup]256[/sup] = 1.34078 *10[sup]154[/sup]. (The exponents associate from the top down to give the largest numbers.)
And, 4[sup]4[sup]4[sup]4[/sup][/sup][/sup] = 4sup[/sup] = 4sup[/sup] = 4[sup](1.34078 *10[sup]154[/sup])[/sup] = …um, a lot.
Now, 4[sup]4[sup]4[sup]4[/sup][/sup][/sup] = [sup]4[/sup]4. Tetration presumably associates downwards as well. What would [sup][sup][sup]4[/sup]4[/sup]4[/sup]4 be?
Bottom line is the OP stated those operations were legal, so I’ll go with those stated ground rules.
There is definitely no upper bound if factorial is allowed. Whatever you think the upper bound is, I’ll just tack a couple factorials on it
18 = 44/[symbol]Ö[/symbol]4 - 4
I can top that yet again:
[sup][sup][sup]4![/sup]4![/sup]4![/sup]4!
I don’t know if I can calculate the actual value of either of these. I don’t think my old version of MathCad is up to it, but I’ll give it a shot…
Sunspace, don’t make me break out the chained arrows. How big is 4 -> 4 -> 4 -> 4
MathCad? Hmm. Seeing the exact value of 4[sup]256[/sup] would be interesting for a start. Less than two hundred digits. Are there any indefinite-precision calculators on the web?