What's the lowest positive integer for which there are no Google search results?
google search search engine · 5 comments · 250 words · read ~304 times.
I found this rather humorous Tweet in which a computer issued a cheque for £2,324,252,080,110:
Thank you for our compensation payment @Northpowergrid for the several days we were without power following #stormarwen Before I bank the cheque however, are you 100% certain you can afford this? #trillionpounds pic.x.com/z5mnc2nxl1
I wondered whether 2324252080110 was a common sort of mistake - like a 32 bit overflow - so I Googled the number:
Huh! It is rare that a search doesn't provide any results. A search for a similar number gives one result - albeit a spam page 
Type in any random number and there's usually something - even if it's just a glitch result.
Every integer under a billion seems to be there (I didn't check exhaustively) - but once you get into the trillions, they become a lot less likely to appear. See:
Of course, by writing 2230101000000 on this page, it will eventually find its way into Google all-seeing index - the original number I searched for now leads to page full of results linking to news stories. It's a little like the interesting number paradox.
If you find a lower positive integer, with no results, please let me know!
I don't know about numbers, but if you search for the Welsh word "hygoelus" you get no results.
Congrats! Googling today for "2230101000000" now returns one and only one result: Your blog post! The same day it was published! Impressive.
Huh, interestingly I got a few results for 230101000000, the best of which is the "color bucket", two colours with the respective hexes of 230101 and 000000 :
Edward I says:
The lowest number I've found is 1 645 404 097 without the spaces.
Luke says:
if you add a bunch of zeros before your number it drastically decreases the number of search results without technically raising the value of the number but this is kinda cheating even though its kinda cheating. like "10324" yields millions of results but "00000000000000000010324" yields none even though it's the same number which makes sense. Also why did this guy say "positive integer" just say whole numbers. Cool post!