Proof that G >> M

Graham's number G and the Moser number M are both humungously large, but G is very much larger than M.


Tim Chow's proof outline

Lemma 1

In any expression involving Knuth arrows and positive integers n > 2, the parenthisation that creates the largest number is the one that associates from the right.

For example, (a^^^b)^^c  <  a^^^(b^^c)

Proof: by induction.

For single arrows, or ordinary exponentiation, this is the well known result that (a^b)^c  <  a^(b^c), or that a^(b×c)  <  a^(b^c), or that b×c < b^c, which is true for b, c > 2.

Lemma 2

If n>2, then n[k+2] < n^^...^^n  (2k-1 arrows)

Proof. From the details of the Moser construction, it is easy to see that n[4] = (...(n^n)^(n^n)...)^...^(...(n^n)^(n^n)...)[2n terms]. From Lemma 1, this is less than the expression with n terms all associating to the right: n[4] < n^n^...^n[2^n terms]. From the definition of Knuth arrows, we have n[4] < n^^2^n

It is not hard to show, for n>2, that n^^2^n <n^^^n

Then one can proceed to the general result by induction on k, invoking Lemma 1 in the general case.

For example, when k=3 (and n>2):

n[5] = n[4]n     [from definition]
   = n[4][4]n-1
   < (n^^^n)[4]n-1    [by Lemma 2, with k = 2]
   < ((n^^^n)^^^(n^^^n))[4]n-2    [by Lemma 2 again]
   ...
   < (...(n^^^n)^^^(n^^^n)...)^^^...^^^(...(n^^^n)^^^(n^^^n)...) (2n terms)
   < n^^^^2^n     [by Lemma 1]
   < n^^^^^n

Proof that G >> M

M = 2[2[5]] < 3[2[5]] < 3^^...^^3 (2[5]×2 -1 arrows), by lemma 2.

Now 2[5] < 3[5] < 3^^^^^3 by lemma 2

So M < 3^^...^^3 (3^^^^^3×2-1 arrows) << G2 << G

[7 July 1998. My thanks to Tim Chow for emailing me this proof.]