69! - Numberphile

[@iedison3839]

I love how they got the most serious guy to do the video on 69

[@madfr]

first reply lol

[@yasyasmarangoz3577]

@@madfr xD yes after this many likes

[@SweetCeeCee7434]

IKR XD.

[@ethanreed2672]

LOL

[@Peter_1986]

Imagine James Grime, Matt Parker or Steve Mould talking about this number.

[@SlyMaelstrom]

In this guy's next video, he's going to show us the importance of 58008 on his calculator.

[@Dan-lg4ti]

+Beerhemd is Illuminaty one of us is not getting a reference here

[@FrancisBehnen]

+Bill N Captian?

[@linktothe_awesome5375]

+Bill N 0.1134

[@dudhauwhejrnrk]

+Bill N and if you turn your calculator upside down and look carefully....

[@joeyhardin5903]

+Erix I find that 5318008 works better.

[@ihavenolifebutilikeboobsth6035]

The only video on the internet titled "69!" that isn't clickbait. Well played Numberphile, well played.

[@quaso0000]

It is actually a clickbait

[@nanamacapagal8342]

@@quaso0000 yeah because you were expecting someting about 69's connotation (because I don't want to write it)

[@PhilipKirkbride]

@@quaso0000 this lol

[@movementjesus]

nice name bro, can relate

[@PresidentligmaBallJr]

420 likes

[@handpaper6871]

We discovered this at school 35 years ago. It was the only function on a scientific calculator that took a noticeable amount of time to complete, so we used it as a benchmark, holding 'factorial races' between models.

[@Crazytesseract]

These days some Casio calculators use look-up tables: the answer is instantaneous.

[@abhaymhatre8534]

Computers have evolved a lot since then

[@arturslunga3415]

I guess the winner got all the girls?

[@vez3834]

@@arturslunga3415 all 0!

[@williamcozbie1233]

@@arturslunga3415 I feel like there was probably enough girls to go around

[@ComposingGloves]

I laughed so hard when he yelled "N!", that's what my friends would do for sure! XD

[@blueslime5855]

My friend does that lol

[@seeseefok7659]

he said the n word!

[@rexyaxy4314]

@@seeseefok7659 ban ban ban

[@chrisgriffith1573]

"N!" needs to be screamed out loud, it's a huge implication for numbers...

[@skitzofredik]

ENN

[@0tiii]

(0:16) Am I the only one who is fascinated by how perfect he draws the "n"?

[@someoneyoudontknow106]

omfg nice n

[@DO-rs6hq]

True, but I'm even more fascinated by the impeccable shout at 00:31

[@salut730]

x'DDDDDDDDDDDD 00:31

[@ProfessorSyndicateFranklai]

Experience will give you that,

[@0tiii]

tbh I never had a maths teacher in school or a prof in college who could draw a "n" as beautiful

[@JoannaZieba]

these people make me want to become a mathematician just so that i can write on brown rolls of paper with blue markers

[@oiux5749]

Same but I want my markers to be scented

[@JoannaZieba]

Oiux Edits wow scented markers be my friend rn

[@SAKOGODZ]

I'd rather use a red sharpie

[@edragoninja317]

#relatable

[@xxneonwolfxx4033]

Joanna Zieba ikr

[@yakinthebox]

Who else was messing with their calculator and already knew it

[@SreenikethanI]

count me in

[@weeb69]

Me!

[@RunielNalovir597]

You got me

[@iisnipergod-robloxpubgandm9483]

YakirR · 92 years ago I almost thought it was 92 years ago

[@SreenikethanI]

@@iisnipergod-robloxpubgandm9483 haha

[@SlyMaelstrom]

I took my pants off for this?

[@paathimself1]

thanks

[@purple_dood_bro8092]

+Bill N ha 69 likes

[@sloanely]

+Bill N I find it hilarious that your first name is Bill, and your last name begins with N, which is the first letter in Nye ... Bill Nye in disguise????

[@PvPigCreations]

+Bill N get out

[@NVAfilm]

the video worked for me

[@CoachJohnMcGuirk]

LIES! you actually ARE supposed to shout factorials. the exclamation means you have to get excited and yell it while doing the math.

[@jfb-]

+Coach McGuirk That implies we're not supposed to be excited when doing maths that doesn't have factorials in it, which is clearly false.

[@nevillestyles]

+jfb-1337 It doesn't imply that. An analogy would be that all people have a heart, but it doesn't mean that everything that has a heart is a human.

[@superoriginalhandle]

I'mNotACitrus Duh!

[@utkarsh330]

Coach McGuirk does ur calculator show the answer for LIES! 😂

[@williedwyer8736]

LIES Factorial LOL

[@ChrisWalshZX]

I saw 69! in the title and instantly remembers the capabilities of my calculator from school!

[@-cookiezila-461]

When a mathematician has exactly the same calculator model as me, a teenager who failed maths: *You and I are not so different*

[@puppergump4117]

Oh a green goblin quote

[@dainmeister]

2012: Wow! What a huge number! 2020: nice

[@user-es3dr5xk8f]

2011 loser

[@dainmeister]

@@user-es3dr5xk8f thank you for the not-at-all toxic remark to my comment. A simple correction would've been nice

[@milesmonaco2625]

Those years make it a double entretaunt

[@RandomHandle-fun2rhymes]

2021: no

[@memerboi69.0]

nice

[@wik3dd]

“it turns out this is the largest number i could put on my calcultor” *oh yeah baby, lets do it*

[@TorGJR3]

Chicken soup. The 2nd reply is literally chicken soup

[@gremlinn7]

I think the following property of 69 is more interesting. It's the only positive integer whose square and cube collectively use each decimal digit exactly once. 69^2 = 4761 69^3 = 328509

[@Pomodorosan]

0:40 from fancy 2 to hastily-drawn fancy 2 to quick 2

[@mrs111198]

Underrated comment 😂😂😂

[@l.z.7320]

The first one is basically a cursive Q.

[@neutronenstern.]

ok if you are genious you will be able to work this out: 1#=1 2#=2 3#=12 4#=288 5#=34560 6#=24883200 7#=?

[@poutineausyropderable7108]

@@neutronenstern.I don't wamma break your fun, but any problem like this as an infinite amount of solutions because you could taylor make a 7 poly which fits the first 6 pointa amd any 7th points of your chosing. Also, polynomial aren't the only types of solutions. It could range from an elemantary function to a transcendal function. And these kinds of patern problem aren't really test of intelligence. But test of patience. And, solving it just involves bruteforcing elementary operation. Ie, stuff a high schooler could do.

[@neutronenstern.]

@@poutineausyropderable7108 yea you are right. But take it with the background of factorial and you should get one answer. Not a polynom. But now another question: try to find a polynom, that fits this question.

[@numberphile]

@ReasonSharp Interesting views on this. But as an outsider I still think it's interesting that 69 is the highest number a traditional, old-fashioned "scientific calculator" can crunch in this way (not just the professor's!) I may be showing my age (growing up with these calculators) but I find it a nice little idiosyncrasy of the number. Perhaps unique to a certain generation? Hope you like the next video more (and that you didn't bang your head too hard)

[@pvic6959]

nice!

[@xrecovery9]

​@@pvic6959 no one asked

[@pvic6959]

@@xrecovery9 nice :)

[@itismethatguy]

@@xrecovery9nicee

[@johntetazoo9848]

@@xrecovery9 nicee

[@derrickbonsell]

I only watched this because I'm childish.

[@jamiefairgrieve]

who didnt

[@ckmishn3664]

Presumably a precocious child though.

[@nielsvansteen9087]

i'm the 69th liker :) i'd say be childish as long as it's possible!

[@LSFilms]

420 likes

[@trippinhard250]

500th like!

[@traktortarik8224]

So this entire video was just some dude talking about the limitations on his calculator?

[@ckmishn3664]

Well he is getting on in years. There's a limit on how much he can use it now.

[@danjbundrick]

"Hey that would get a lot of clicks." Really that's all you need to know.

[@BrownHairL]

This entire channel is about numbers. This is a video about a number.

[@keknegenkai2700]

This channel is about numbers and their meanings and properties and this video in particular is to show how vast the range of numbers is and how hard it is to fully visualize them. And we humans are after all, very visual beings. We like to see a picture in order to understand a theorem behind it. If you aren't interested in numbers, why are you even watching a video on this channel?

[@jevicci]

Most pointless Numberphile video I've seen yet.

[@keithwilson6060]

In my more innocent years, I thought an error on a calculator meant the number didn’t exist.

[@Rudymc-du7or]

I found it interesting when my calculator could handle 69! But not 70!. Glad to hear the reason!

[@inx1819]

My ti-89 titanium can do up to 449! which is impressive

[@newcantinacrispychickentac7754]

@@inx1819 mine can calculate up to 19,515!

[@inx1819]

@@newcantinacrispychickentac7754 Are you using wolfram?

[@marcsebastianacusar9044]

My phone calculator can handle 170! XD

[@mishlinpillay9230]

@@marcsebastianacusar9044 10116!

[@Toze_Neto]

The limit of my calculator is 449! = 38519305180281 x 10^984 Should i make a video about it?

[@francinea.b.7602]

Yes.

[@alikhan81]

Toze Neto HAHA

[@mccmd9259]

+Toze Neto I'd personally like to see it!

[@johanneswalter8754]

my free calculator on my handy is aviable to 6000

[@franciscog4071]

I think it focuses on max digits- My calculator at (x^x!)! Runs out at 3. They limit 10^n to 100 on most, 1000 on your $100 one

[@guitarraccoon1541]

If you shout 0 loud enough, it becomes 1. 0!

[@Peter_1986]

And even better, you can shout it as loud as you want and still get 1. 0!! = 1 0!!! = 1 0!!!!!!!!!! = 1

[@sukhmandersingh4306]

Another proof that if you shout a lie loud enough it becomes truth

[@cosmic4716]

@@sukhmandersingh4306 deep

[@nooneliterallynoone1962]

And if you shout 0 in reverse it also becomes 1

[@RandomHandle-fun2rhymes]

@@Peter_1986 So 0!!!!!!!...(10000000000000!! !’s)!!!!! equals 1?

[@korliyon2283]

"The number becomes too big for my calculator."

[@jasonl8720]

Literally the most exciting thing about this number

[@usernametaken017]

Figuratively the most exciting thing about this number

[@puppergump4117]

Yeah I'm getting really excited thinking about that number.

[@Epiousios18]

Your profile picture is prefect for this comment.

[@zacharymorhaim7362]

I was let down by the lack of immaturity in this video.

[@jackharley8564]

So wait - this whole video is about the llimitations of some old guy's calculator...........................

[@AhrkFinTey]

It's about 69! being the largest factorial less than a googol.

[@timetochronicle]

I think most calculators have 10 to the power of 99 as a limit. I wonder if more modern school calculators can go beyond that limit...

[@rootnon]

so tempting to troll this guys "like" number but, its just too beautiful

[@nicklopez8004]

Jack Harley switch that number of likes around and you get the 69

[@nicklopez8004]

Jack Harley haha my phone calculator is more advanced than that old man's my phone was able to do factorial 70, beat that old man

[@secularmonk5176]

The take-away: 69! is the largest factorial that is still smaller than a googol. ... wait, "googol" isn't in KZbin's auto spellchecker? ... OK, TWO things I've learned.

[@andrybak]

It is not a KZbins spellchecker, it's in your browser.

[@secularmonk5176]

So Google Chrome can't spell "googol"? Maybe they're trying to be ironic? (Just checked IE ... googol is in its dictionary.)

[@LittleLionRawr]

Len Arends Well, it makes sense to limit the spell dictionary to the words that are used most often when it comes to similar words if one is not used often and the other is used very often.. In this case that would be Googol and Google....

[@TheJesseWu]

"Googol" is spelled "Googol"? I thought it was spelled "Googel". The more you know.

[@LittleLionRawr]

Wait a minute! What if the name Google doesn't actually come from Googol but from googly eyes? :p Googly *_is_* in Chrome's dictionary by the way xD

[@hasanyousef6782]

Now I've got an interesting fact about calculators to share in my conversations with the strange people as an attempt to make new friends.

[@0x2A_]

"in my conversations with the strange people" this part of your comment intrigues me, so many questions about the strange people

[@sorenlorenson8327]

@@0x2A_ exactly I am glad I am not the only one who feels that way 😊

[@benh1026]

Q: Why is 69 the limit on his calculator? A: After 69, he has to turn around! *badum tsss*

[@lucasagustinmangini]

+Arkona Apkoha man you are incredibly not fun

[@_chappie_]

sorry mate, gave u the 70th like

[@DeusExAstra]

1 is the loneliest number, but 69 is the friendliest.

[@imrk1947]

I see what you did there

[@racclng]

96 is the loneliest number

[@RingxWorld]

+Leo McKay 6.9 has it bad too

[@ncedwards1234]

it's always fun when at school a teacher asks you to name any number and you get to say sixty-.... eight................point nine. because when you say it right people think you're going to say 69 but you say 68 then add a nine just for the heck of it.

[@coopergates9680]

+Nathan Edwards "sixty eight point nine nine nine recurring" :P

[@Cochu]

imagine shouting 69! in the street

[@TehLuvablePup]

*69 FACTORIAL!!!*

[@Cochu]

Chas Larcomb 69!!!!!!!1111¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡

[@viewer4194]

I will do it ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[@offwhite5875]

'69 FACTORIAL'

[@noncanadian]

a task too tall for these britches o _o

[@Utars]

Nobody: Everybody: *NICE*

[@danielnovoselski1587]

Nice

[@Rabbit-the-One]

I feel like this comment is a contradiction.... Somehow

[@gabrielz6047]

im the 69th like

[@supakorn_mhee]

Nice

[@hankinoco7052]

@@gabrielz6047 nice dude

[@djhalling]

So calculate 69!, then multiply by 7 and add 1 to the exponent.

[@bernhardriemann3821]

IAM 69TH LIKE

[@_lexi]

0:54 Did it bother anyone else that he didn't put the equals sign next to the 4?

[@SammS95]

Yes! I kept looking back at it hoping he might have added it in each time the camera changed >,

[@singingblueberry]

+Sam Streeter Same here

[@SnoopCatts]

Yep, pretty sad lol

[@pezpeculiar9557]

Only your OCD.

[@Oski360]

+Feliks Łukasiewicz I like your comment but I don't want to press thumbs up because you have 69 likes!

[@SteveDice21]

We're on 2016 and no calculator I've ever owned goes past 69! which makes me think someone on Casio is a child.

[@eigenvector7035]

+Steve Dice most casios can calculate up to 9.99x10^99, even the (formerly) expensive graphing models. Honestly, who needs a number this big? If you need you can take a computer, that can go way further.

[@eigenvector7035]

What was not fully said in the video (he mentioned that it's 1.711...x10^98 but nothing more) Is that when your calculation exceeds a certain value, your calculator switches to another method (algorithm) of handling numbers. It stores them as "something times ten to the power of something" and that's called exponential notation. Most calculator are then programmed that the calculation may not exceed 9.999...x10^99 and that's the biggest number they can do. If you want to go higher, use a computer. And not excel or another spreadsheet program because they too use exponential notation. Try python. It's simple and can do big numbers well.

[@krisztianszirtes5414]

MS calculator can reach 3248! which has a result ending with 10^9997 I say that's pretty big.

[@TheVMDC]

I was the 69th like like huehue

[@ztraws2]

I was gonna like but I realized that there were 69 likes

[@wolfelkan8183]

So his calculator can display any number up to a googol.

[@coderhub-tech7942]

Correct, they just display 10 to the power of 100

[@scottyzacharia8386]

I don't even wanna know what people were thinking in the comments section after watching a video about the number "69"

[@slobert]

liked it to ruin the number MUAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAH

[@coopergates9680]

80 is a factor of 69! so that is okay lol, 81 and 82 are as well.... although 83 is not ;)

[@jasonneu81]

Cooper Gates How is 80 a factor of it?

[@coopergates9680]

***** 80 is just 2^4 * 5. When you multiply all the positive integers up to 69, the number 80 is not in there, but the resulting number is still divisible by 80.

[@johnfrommanagement6037]

Not my proudest fap

[@augustburnsred3541]

u mean tosin abasi

[@FYIitsnotme]

But not the worst one, either.

[@almondjake1]

Chris Letchford

[@johnfrommanagement6037]

Patrick Wise ur comment ;)

[@tgvv2980]

John From Management u weird braw

[@rantlord8373]

Q) What are the 70 things to make a man happy --> One is alcohol the rest is 69!

[@mattverhoeven9837]

That would make at least 1.7*10^98 more things than 70

[@myownmeadow1320]

Before I even look, there’s probably some, if not a lot of, “Nice”.

[@luni1946]

Nice

[@person8064]

Nice

Nice

[@memeologist3481]

Nice

[@FBIchan]

Nice

[@dante224real1]

i really love factorials. they are like inverse primes that have so many interesting uses in larger probability study and quantum mechanical processes. what i mean by inverse primes is that they instead of being the least divisible numbers they are the most divisible numbers. fun factorial fact: 14!= 144144 weeks in seconds. I 4 1 think that's 4tunate and 1derful.

[@coopergates9680]

The larger factorials are actually not highly composite numbers because they have too many factors of two, and sometimes three. They are highly divisible but there is a number below a large factorial that has at least as many divisors. Use the least common multiples as a general rule instead: Writing the prime factorization just requires the highest power of each prime in your number range. LCM 1-12 = 2^3 * 3^2 * 5 * 7 * 11 = 27720 LCM 1-15 = 2^3 * 3^2 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 = 360360 Yup, 360360 is divisible by anything from 1 to 15, while 9!, which is 362880, is not divisible by 11 or 13. LCM 1-26 = 2^4 * 3^2 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 * 19 * 23 = 26771144400 How many factors does 26771144400 have? 5 * 3 * 3 * 2^6 = 45 * 64 = 2880 factors. The first factorial greater than this is 14!, which is 87178291200.... what's the prime factorization of 14! ? 2^11 * 3^5 * 5^2 * 7^2 * 11 * 13 14! has 2592 factors... nice try, though :P

[@dante224real1]

man 14! has a buncha building blocks for such a small visual number like "14". its pretty neat all in all.

[@coopergates9680]

Daniel Williams How about the LCM of 1-30... 2^4 * 3^3 * 5^2 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 * 19 * 23 * 29 = 2329089562800 Maybe we should invent a symbol for the least common multiple operator, analogous to ! lol

[@coopergates9680]

10! is 6 weeks' worth of seconds.. hahahah

[@joshtheegotist]

Daniel Williams Wrong 14! = 87178291200

[@david8748]

I am having a hard time figuring out the meaning of this video...

[@ooglefluffg857]

Geez, the Windows calculator can do up to 3248!, which is 1.9736342530860425312047080034031x10^9997.

[@mariuszanfir2298]

+Googlefluff857 Actually is 3248.77XXXX! :P You can put as many decimals as you can/want as long as you don't go over 10^9999.

[@ooglefluffg857]

Mzn T I wasn't that dedicated :P

[@jasontofini3412]

+Cleroth no

[@harrynewton4786]

+Googlefluff857 python can do bigger

[@Astro-X]

+Mzn T Actually it can even go to 3248.77019872xx! I couldn't be bothered getting all those numbers to 9 haha

[@frosticstyle5272]

sees title: Nice

[@ASkinnyWhiteGuy]

I always thought of factorials as loud, spastic numbers that don't know when to shut up.

[@nishantsvnit]

0:19 He should have mentioned "where n is a POSITIVE integer."

[@pritigajjar4105]

or n is a whole number

[@lucascisneros8147]

Where n>=0

[@joryjones6808]

N is a natural number. It is easy to remember because n can be thought of as standing for natural in this case.

[@utkarshsharma5815]

Actually factorial of negative Numbers is treated as infinity which you can think of as -1! = 0!/0. This concept is used in permutations and combinations wherever the denominator turns out to be a negative factorial and we take it as a number tending to zero

[@thisisarjunbutwhythehellar6188]

So u do read N.C.E.R.T books....

[@ActionHeinz]

This makes me smile. I remember back in school I had (and still have) the exact same calculator. And I remember trying to find out what’s the largest number it can show, so I tried high faculties and noticed that 69! is the limit. It’s so funny to see a Numberphile video with the same topic on the same calculator over 15 years later :D

[@cricketrevisited1379]

3248! - the largest factorial number you can calculate in the windows 10 calculator

[@givemesuccsucceva__9867]

Before I watch does it talk about the position?

[@The_RoboDoc]

Gruss __ nope

[@NoSkates]

They did mention particle physics towards the end.

[@GBSHD]

Gruss __ nope

[@The_RoboDoc]

No

[@nafinapkin5439]

Has 69 likes nice

[@TheYaddayadda]

Just proves that every video that ends with a 69 is well worth watching

[@eviltrollface647]

This video was not worth watching.

[@mebezaccraft]

I thought he said salsa particles at the end...

[@NoriMori1992]

I love that this is one of Numberphile's _first_ videos!

[@gdogvibes1]

So what was the point of this video?

[@lewisbrooker123]

Too see how many dirty minded people there were on youtube???

[@freeb1e963]

To Explain Factorization

[@PupdudePwns]

To talk about a number people normally think as dirty in a non-dirty way.

[@ChrisL4310]

To show that his calculator's computation can not be greater than 69!.

[@bcat010]

video descriptions aren't just for show, you know

[@djbeezy]

Is it driving anyone esle nuts he didn't put an equals sign next to 4!?

[@Qermaq]

+wash beezy You need a beer.

[@djbeezy]

Qermaq I think you're right.

[@slowmojoe7553]

No.

[@mephilesthedark9270]

70! = Math ERROR

[@silversonome5360]

The fact that the channel is named "Numberphile" makes this video a thousand times better

[@farhan3730]

Who else expected the topic of this video to be... Slightly... Different?

[@SniperMonkeh]

I didn't.

[@joabbelmont8809]

It's a math channel, what did you expect?

[@levix1524]

*nice*

[@FalB27]

Nice

[@tuesdaymartesvr1942]

Nice

[@CATboss001]

Nice

[@memeologist3481]

Nice

[@randomicatto]

NICE

[@mod3no]

0:31 N!!!! :DD

[@hawthornrabbit]

ThaXLR8Channel - that'd be a great sample for some kind of mathematical music remix. XD

[@NoriMori1992]

+hawthornbunny You've made me want to make one.

[@ramlett115]

Ah yes, i too love the pocket calculator FX-83WA

[@bennattj]

So what was the point to this video? He didn't explain why the calculator cannot do 70 factorial. And this number actually seems somewhat odd. The answer should be that multiplying by 70 overflows the calculator and to understand that he would have to explain floating point numbers (a computer science lesson). Having said that if the calculator uses IEEE floating point single precision then it shouldn't even be able to do 69! and if it uses IEEE floating point double precision, then it should be able to do a much higher factorial. Single precision can go up to 10^38 while double precision can go up to 10^308 (which you can figure means it should be able to do at least 100^154, so somewhere around 154!), just look up IEEE 754-1985 which (still) defines the single and double precision representations. Indeed if you try on google's calculator (which clearly uses double precision), you can do up to 170 factorial (just search "170!").

[@300daysandnights]

hehehe 69.....

[@darkmoonblade4165]

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[@Xenial.-]

lol

[@sebastianespejoloyaga7603]

300daysandnights 669 likes

[@SJrad]

699 likes xD

[@jahidhossen2616]

STAB Gaming 69 .

[@negativeseven]

Google goes up to 170!

[@rogerwang21]

1024-bit calculator

[@pedromaneiro123]

My calculator goes up to 7980! or something like that.

[@fightingfights5503]

Hey, I figured this out once due to boredom in math class.

[@pakeroizbawicielo]

When I typed 100000000000! my Win7 calculator aplication crashed.

[@OmegaPaladin144]

I remember finding this out in class while messing around with my calculator. Naturally, as I was an immature teenager, I was amused that 69 was the biggest number my calculator could perform a factorial on. I was actually trying to find ways of saying 69 without attracting attention in doing so, such as 45, 59, 105, and various roots and powers.

[@BalloonShot]

The funny thing is I was playing around with my school calculators a couple months back (8th grade if your wondering) and I decided to find the largest number I can factorialize without overflowing. I found this fact out before I clicked on this video.

[@grtgurtgurduyurtguighi257]

Not a hard thing to find out

[@BalloonShot]

grtgurtgurdu yurtguighi I never said it was.

[@coopergates9680]

Balloon Shot Too bad they made the TI-86 able to go to 9.9999E999 but not most later models.

[@codernakul]

This the only on numberphile i knew beforehand because i always play with my calculator

[@AlexGamingElite]

Oh 69 how you made humans weird

[@Itisjustasaganow]

Numberphile trolled to all people's dirty minds :V

[@5hak3itup]

this is a factorial. this is my calculator. look, my calculator says error if you exceed the memory capacity!

[@chrisgaming9567]

One day I aim to have this level of maturity

[@gbrosnan95]

I would really like to hear the "other story" he mentions at the end!

[@rulersonicboom4737]

So this video was just about a guy who was (maybe) sad that he can't get 70 factorial on his calculator. It showed no interesting properties of the no. "69". :/

[@bunnygirl8]

Well, technically it showed the interesting property that it's the last factorial below a googol (10^100). It's not really helpful information, nor does it exactly call for a whole video around it, but it's still interesting.

[@traceyriley6626]

I asked Alexa what's 10 to the power of 262 she said 1•(10 to the power of 26) come on alexa

[@imperialblast]

that’s wrong

[@hellomynameisjoenl]

That’s not even close.

[@hellomynameisjoenl]

But the right answer would be ten quintillion octogintillion or 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

[@abhirajarora7631]

Cha cha real smooth.

[@saraflint2982]

The largest factorial the computer's calculator can show is 3,248!. It is expressed as 1.9736342530860425312047080034031 x 10^9997. The largest factorial integer that fits the calculator entirely is 29! (8,841,761,993,739,701,954,543,616,000,000).

[@TheNimaid]

That's Numberwang!

[@S-I-T]

😁

[@McSnails.]

XD!!!!!

[@misterbobo137]

The resulting factorial of 200,000! is 973,351 digits long. The result also contains 49,998 trailing zeroes (which constitutes to 5.14% of the whole number)

[@arnoldlopez3422]

My immaturity led me to here.

[@briandeschene8424]

I remember messing around with my first “scientific” calculator (expensive at the time) which I bought used in 1979 with no users manual (there was no Internet to look anything up). I figured out what the x! button did just by trial-and-error. That sudden Eureka! moment of understanding was a rush.

[@TheFelepeno]

Half life 3 confirmed.

[@Yipper64]

Half Life 69 confirmed. (its a fan project)

[@masteroflame6141]

How did it prove hl3 is getting released exactly? (ik it's a meme)

[@carternemerson3958]

Please

[@talschechner5168]

Um...69? Anybody? (Immature joke)

[@barry6541]

+tal schechner That's the joke...

[@louisrust]

+Alec Lipscomb you're the joke jk i'm not too mean... i don't think

[@tonicooreidonorte7871]

+tal schechner I come here just because of this...

[@sotya7097]

*Has 69 likes*

[@ammarabdalla5433]

+tal schechner 69 likes

[@LizzyVonBloom]

This dude has no idea.

[@LacayoDe]

So basically I learnt absolutely nothing. 😂 I wanted to learn that it was magical somehow

[@guykruger1]

all that time just that to say that 69 is the largest integer whose factorial can be calculated by a standard pocket calculator?? man, that's 200 seconds of my life I'd like to get back...

[@damon22441]

All of these comments, and no one is vexed by the missing equal sign for the 4! set?

[@user-gi3ro9rm9k]

i watched this entire video to watch some guy talking about how large of a number his calculator can get to... i dont understand why im even on youtube anymore

[@JLConawayII]

I just typed 69! into my TI-89 and it gave me the exact number rather than a number in scientific notation. Scroll scroll scroll......scroll....scroll.....oh there's the end.

[@diamondsrubies9423]

I just realised, that professor's first n was incredible...

[@mendelsonroy279]

+Diamonds Rubies OMG You're so right

[@FratFerno]

It takes a true "numberphile"/"numerophile" to not be a "philophile".

[@Intelligent_investor]

My phone calculator can go up to 4654! I'd say that it's quite impressive.

[@lukandrate9866]

My phone calculator can go up to 205022! Which is approximately 1.221277×10^999999 probably because it cannot handle numbers greater than or equal to 10^1000000

[@RubyPiec]

Me: 69! The internet: bro y u yelling for ***

[@cruelfish4824]

The highest factorial my calculator can calculate is 3249!. I dont get the point of this video.

[@Bjowolf2]

CruelFish 69! used to be the maximum value that could be calculated directly on most calculators until a few years ago ( 69! < 9.9999 .... * 10^99 ). Your calculator is probably still a bit out of the ordinary I imagine? ;-)

[@cruelfish4824]

Bjowolf2 Hah, yes. it has a few megabytes of memory (ﾟДﾟ)

[@Bjowolf2]

***** Of course they can - as far as you like - it's really just a question of having enough storage space, the right software ( big number routines ) - and time ;-) But it was usually how high most (ordinary) scientific calculators could go until a few years ago ( 10 - 15 or so ). But you could easily muchhigher by yourself if you either used logarithms ( to convert the product into a sum - and then keep score of the powers of ten ), or simply "normalised" the product - or the factors - along the way ( dividing by suitable powers of 10 ), when the product ( the factorial ) starts to grow too big - and then simply adding up all these powers of ten up independently.

[@singingblueberry]

Or, to be honest, the real point of this video is just the joke about 69 :)

[@Bjowolf2]

+singingblueberry hardly ;-)

[@ygalel]

There is absolutely no way that the team who built the calculator did not think of this

[@jettiz3703]

I thought the number 69 would be linked with Cancer.

[@1sb3rg34]

Jett TheDoctor Well, it links with aids XD

[@1sb3rg34]

Did you get it?

[@ЭлементМагии]

I got it, nice one!

[@1sb3rg34]

Элемент Магии Thx XD

[@proxy1035]

i thought me meant Cancer is Like the Zodiac Signs since the Sign for Cancer is basically 69 but 90° Rotated.

[@weirdyoda04]

Windows calculator limit is 3248!. I got 1.973634253...X 10^9997

[@kekag]

The google calculator limit is 170!, I got 7.257416... x 10^306

[@tomonator1361]

Wow That’s big

[@heartache5742]

go on numberphile

[@likealightbulb5186]

Perfect math videos dont exi-

[@PiastTorun]

I found this myself while playing around during the spare time after i finished my tests.

[@DorangoBread]

That click bait tho...

[@ArnoldsKtm]

But it's not. Did you even watch the video?

[@TheRelaxingWind]

My brain is exploding.