From Planck Length to Graham's Number

[Airbrush]

I posted this in Other Sciences, but this will probably get more attention in the Lounge.

Anyone familiar with very large numbers and very small things?  My questions was:  suppose you could fill a volume the size of the observable universe (less than 100 billion light-years in diameter) with a tiny sand that is so tiny that each sand grain is one Planck Length in diameter.  Could you fill that volume with Graham's number of Planck-sized sand?  My guess is yes you could fill the observable universe with Planck-sized sand.  You could probably fill a volume you cannot even comprehend how large with Graham's number of Planck-sized sand.  This is what I found in Wikipedia:

"... the observable universe is far too small to contain an ordinary digital representation of Graham's number, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume, possibly the smallest measurable space. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers ...."

Graham's number - Wikipedia

Next question.  Is Graham's number larger than a googolplex, raised to a googolplex power, a googolplex number of times?  (That means you keep raising the number to a googolplex power, and you do so a googolplex number of times.)

Edited August 15, 2022 by Airbrush

[swansont]

14 hours ago, Airbrush said:

I posted this in Other Sciences

!

Moderator Note

No, you posted it in the Lounge, but it's not appropriate for the Lounge. I moved it.

 

14 hours ago, Airbrush said:

but this will probably get more attention in the Lounge.

!

Moderator Note

That's not a consideration. This is a scientific topic, so it doesn't belong here. Please stop doing this. One thread per topic, posted in the appropriate area