You're quite right...The number is more like
10^1000 by some current methods of counting.
This could easily be off by 500 (less) zero's
or an uncertain number of greater zero's.
Curiously, I noticed the New York Times made
exactly the same error when they discussed this
many months ago. No self respecting typist
could imagine 10^1000 might stand for 1000000000...
for 10 or 20 pages!
Slashdot Mirror
You're quite right...The number is more like 10^1000 by some current methods of counting. This could easily be off by 500 (less) zero's or an uncertain number of greater zero's. Curiously, I noticed the New York Times made exactly the same error when they discussed this many months ago. No self respecting typist could imagine 10^1000 might stand for 1000000000... for 10 or 20 pages!