Re: Rather large number, LONG POST

new topic     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

(16777216^480000) / 756864000

Yes,  That seems like the correct calculation.
And  MY ANSWER is this.

It requires a minimum of 3 bytes to store the number 16777216. That is
assuming that the
number is stored in Compressed byte code. IN text readabley form it
obviously requires 8
bytes.
NOW the closest to base to base 10 readable is either base 8 (octal) or
base 16
(hexdecimal).  That is if you stay in some sort of base 2 (binary) format.
Staying in binary
allows me to quickly and easily compute a rough estimate as to how many
bytes would be
required to store the ANSWER to your equation.

NOW !! 16777216 is 3 bytes.
And 16777216^2 = 6 bytes
Therefore 16777216^n = 3*n bytes
Thus, 16777216^480000 = 3*480000
So 480000*3 = 1440000 bytes or 1,440,000

But of course we haven't as of yet worried about dividing the tiny number
of 756864000.
IF you don't think 756864000 is a small number at this moment then you
haven't grasp the
fact that the number you are dividing into takes up 1.44 million bytes. And
that is in a tight
binary format.

NOW you should realize that dividing by this number won't even been an
Ice-cube from the
Iceberg that sunk the Titanic.  It simply won't effect the magnitude of the
size of this
number.

With that out of the way I will begin explaining the number of bytes it
will take up if converted
from 3 byte 16777216 base to 1 byte 16 base.  16 base of course is still
much less space
than it would actually take if it were in 10 base Readable digits.  BUT the
next closest binary
base is 8 and it would take up more than 10 base Readable.  And I don't
want to over
exaggerate the size of this number.

16777216 = 24 bit info
16 = 4 bit info
Thus 16 bit will be taking 6 times the space.

6 * 1,440,000 or 8,640,000 bytes being used.
That comes to roughly 8megs of space just to store this number.

Any volunteers in creating this number?  I have come up with some rather
interesting facts
that should greatly increase the speed of generating it.
I now have a much fuller knowledge how bignum.e works and should be able to
use it to my
advantage.
SO,  Any takers?  I will generate the code if someone actually wants to
create this
Enormous number.  After all, I do believe I now know the fastest technique
to generate
the number.  That doesn't mean the code won't take awhile to run though.

If you read all this message then YOU obviously love math.

Hope this knowledge helps someone.

PS: Email me if you want me to create that code
_________________________

Lucius L. Hilley III    lhilley at cdc.net
http://www.cdc.net/~lhilley
http://www.americanantiques.com
http://www.dragonvet.com
_________________________

new topic     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu