Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: forceOfHabit who wrote (89636)	11/3/2008 11:30:54 AM
From: Little Joe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

I can't even comprehend that. Little joe

To: forceOfHabit who wrote (89636)	11/3/2008 1:12:13 PM
From: benwood	Respond to of 116555

My source which may be old was 1.2 x 10^112. It's understandable that the estimates would vary quite a bit, although 10^32 seems to be a bit extreme. Does your source work for one of the bond rating agencies now, by any chance <g> Or maybe mine does <ggg> edit: so much for trying to remember big numbers twenty years later. After a bit of poking around, I remember where I got my number -- it was a comparison between atoms in the universe (which I believe was close to your estimate) and the total possible combinations in a game of chess (the 10^112 estimate) meaning a computer could not have a database of all possible outcomes, although I'm sure there are a gazillion transpositions.