"One quadrillion to the power of four."

Discussion in 'The Green Room' started by Kommander, Dec 9, 2020.

  1. Kommander

    Kommander Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,291
    Location:
    Detroit
    Ratings:
    +6,999
    Since I'm not allowed to do math in the Red Room, and I'm terrible at math as it is, I figured I'd show my work here so someone can tell me where and how I fucked up.

    "One in one quadrillion to the power of four," works out to be one novemdecillion, or 10^60.

    I was thinking about sand, so I googled "How many grains of sand could fit in the observable universe?" and the number it gave me was 10^63, 1000 times more.

    So, I multiplied the average volume of a grain of sand by 1000 and got roughly 1 cubic centimeter.

    So, if I divide the number of grains of sand that can fit in the universe by 1000, I get the volume of the universe in cubic centimeters. 10^63/1000 = 10^60

    The volume of the universe is "one quadrillion to the power of four" cubic centimeters.

    Edit: I googled "volume of the observable universe" and according to Wikipedia it's 4 * 10^80 cubic meters. If that's true, the grains of sand that could fit is WAY off.
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2020
    • popcorn popcorn x 2
  2. K.

    K. Sober

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    27,298
    Ratings:
    +31,281
    Sand grains have diameters of an average of .4mm. pi x (.4mm)^3 x 4 / 3 =~.268cmm=.000268ccm. So it's more like 4000.

    Also, 10^63 is Archimedes' number, and while his maths was impressive for his time, he didn't quite have an inkling of the size we imagine the universe to be today.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Paladin

    Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    50,154
    Location:
    Spacetime
    Ratings:
    +53,512
    The Sand Reckoner! That's a classic. Yes, old Archimedes could do the math, but his cosmology was a bit...understated.
  4. Kommander

    Kommander Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,291
    Location:
    Detroit
    Ratings:
    +6,999
    I didn't actually measure the volume of a .4mm sphere myself, I googled the answer and it said .009 cm^3, which is wrong.

    I'll actually do the math myself (by typing the radius into a sphere calculator) and... 0.00034 cm^3

    Hmm...

    Oh, you plugged the diameter into the equation, not the radius.

    Anyway, this is all dumb and precisely why I dropped out of college.


    After double-checking, yes, the thing I saw was the Archemedes thing. I saw the number was off by three orders of magnitude and my confirmation bias got the best of me.

    In the RR I estimated that the galaxy was 10^60 liters, let's see how close that is:

    8 billion cubic light years is 6.8 * 10^60 liters. So, a volume of 7ish liters gets me the probability I need.

    So, yeah, one is to one novemdecillion as a basketball's volume is to the Milky Way's volume.

    Science!
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Kommander

    Kommander Bandwagon

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2010
    Messages:
    3,291
    Location:
    Detroit
    Ratings:
    +6,999
    I think I'm having the same problem, except for the "could do math" part.
    • Funny Funny x 2
  6. K.

    K. Sober

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    27,298
    Ratings:
    +31,281
    Dammit, you're right! Can I put this on a translation error?
    • Sad Sad x 1