Anything called a chair or table (e.g., multiplication tables, positions of authority) counts, but things similar to chairs or tables but not called as such (e.g., benches or desks) do not count.
Update 2025-05-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has clarified the resolution process:
Market participants are encouraged to make their case for items to be considered 'chairs' or 'tables', in line with the market description.
The creator will weigh the arguments presented to determine the final counts for chairs and tables.
If, after this evaluation, chairs are determined to be more numerous than tables, the market will resolve to YES.
Otherwise, the market will resolve to NO.
Update 2025-05-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - The count of chairs and tables is limited to those found on Earth.
Update 2025-05-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to a user's question about counting abstract multiplication tables (an example item from the original market description), the creator has specified:
Only physically existing instances of items like multiplication tables will be counted.
Abstract concepts or definitions (e.g., the mathematical idea of a multiplication table) do not count in themselves. Only their physical manifestations on Earth (such as a printed table or one displayed on a physical screen) are eligible for the count.
Update 2025-05-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to an argument that an item should not count if 'chair' is used descriptively (e.g., as an adjective in 'chair conformation') rather than as a direct noun for the item itself, the creator stated: 'Yes, only anything called a chair counts.' This indicates:
The argument that a descriptive use of the word 'chair' will be handled on a case-by-case basis to determine whether an item is 'called a chair' is accepted by the creator.
Update 2025-05-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to discussions regarding whether certain molecular structures count as chairs (e.g., the 'chair conformation' of cyclohexane), the creator has specified:
Molecular formations or conformations (such as 'chair conformation') will not be counted as chairs for the purpose of this market.
This means individual molecules adopting such a shape or conformation do not each count as a separate chair, even if the term 'chair' is part of the name of the formation or conformation.
Update 2025-05-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided provisional guidance on how digital tables will be counted:
For now, the intention is to count one digital file as one table (e.g., a single spreadsheet file would count as one table, regardless of how many distinct tables it might contain).
This approach is subject to a poll that the creator will conduct to determine the final counting method for such items.
Update 2025-05-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has explicitly confirmed that the market will not resolve to PROB. The resolution will be either YES or NO.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has indicated a change in how molecular formations or conformations (e.g., the 'chair conformation' of cyclohexane) will be assessed for the count:
A previous update specified that such formations would not be counted as chairs.
The creator has now stated they will conduct a poll on this specific issue after reviewing a new source (a 'chemist's book').
The outcome of this poll will determine if these items are to be counted, and potentially how, thereby possibly revising the earlier rule.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has announced the outcome of a previously mentioned poll regarding molecular formations:
Cyclohexane chair formations will now count as chairs. This updates the rule from the AI summary dated 2025-05-09, which stated that molecular formations or conformations (such as 'chair conformation') would not be counted.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided guidance on counting tensors:
Tensors that are akin to data tables can be counted as tables.
To be included in the count, a tensor must have a physical manifestation, such as existing on a file.
Tensors that exist only as abstract concepts (e.g., solely within an equation) will not be counted.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator is conducting a new poll to determine how cyclohexane chair formations are quantified. Specifically, the poll will decide if a cyclohexane chair formation should be counted as:
one chair, or
several chairs. This poll will further clarify the counting rules for cyclohexane chair formations, which were previously confirmed to be included in the count of chairs. The outcome of this poll will determine their specific contribution to the total chair count.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator is undertaking further research regarding the counting of tensors. This research is in response to discussions about:
The counting of tensors within entities like tensor fields.
The previously stated guidance that a tensor must exist on a file to be counted. The rules for counting tensors may be updated or further clarified based on the outcome of this research.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has further clarified the criteria for counting tensors as tables:
In a discussion regarding tensors that are part of general physical concepts (such as those in tensor fields or a tensor existing at every point in space), the creator stated, 'All these tensors are not tabulated however'.
This indicates that for a tensor to be counted as a table, it must be tabulated. This requirement is in addition to previously mentioned conditions, such as having a physical manifestation (e.g., existing on a file) and being generally akin to data tables.
Consequently, tensors that are not presented in a tabulated format will not be counted as tables, even if they are stored on a file or otherwise have a physical manifestation.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided a specific estimate for how tabulated tensors will contribute to the table count:
The creator stated, "I'm going to count them as few hundred million tables, my best estimate of how many are actually tabulated."
This indicates that tensors meeting the previously established criteria (such as being akin to data tables, having a physical manifestation on Earth, and importantly, being tabulated) will be collectively counted as contributing a "few hundred million" to the total table count.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided a new clarification regarding the counting of table salt and has refined the interpretation of the market's core criterion 'anything called a chair or table counts'. This new clarification impacts a previous understanding based on an earlier AI summary (dated 2025-05-10) where the creator was reported as being 'convinced' to count table salt molecules as tables.
Key points from the creator's latest comment:
Table salt: Individual molecules of table salt will not be counted as tables.
Reasoning for exclusion: The creator states this is because 'nobody refers to it as a table.'
Contrast with chair conformations: This is distinguished from chair conformations (e.g., of cyclohexane), which do count as chairs because, according to the creator, they 'are referred to by some experts as a "chair".'
Refined interpretation of 'called a chair/table': This indicates that for an item to be counted, it is not sufficient for 'chair' or 'table' to merely be part of its name. Instead, the item itself must be referred to as 'a chair' or 'a table.' The standard for this referral may differ (e.g., expert referral for specialized terms like 'chair conformation,' general referral for other items).
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided a specific rule for quantifying items like 'chair conformation' cyclohexane molecules, which are referred to as 'chairs' in specialized contexts:
In response to a discussion about these items, the creator stated, 'all the "chairs" count as 1 chair.'
This indicates that all instances of such 'chairs' (e.g., all 'chair conformation' cyclohexane molecules on Earth) will collectively count as a single (1) chair towards the total chair count.
This resolves a previous point where a poll was to determine if each such instance would count as one or several chairs, by establishing that the entire category of these specific 'chairs' contributes one unit to the total chair count.
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): * Lookup tables are eligible to be counted as tables.
A key criterion for an item to qualify as a lookup table is whether it is something someone would reasonably call a lookup table.
The following items have been specified as not counting as lookup tables (and therefore not as tables for this market):
Multiplexers
Individual bits of memory
Update 2025-05-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to discussions regarding HashTables, the creator has stated:
HashTables will not count as tables for the purpose of this market.
The reason provided for this exclusion is that they are not tabulated.
Update 2025-05-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has indicated that the countability of the noun used to refer to an item is a relevant factor in its quantification for the market.
Specifically, if an item is referred to by an uncountable noun (also known as a mass noun) in the context being argued, it will not be counted as a large number of individual, discrete units.
This was specified in response to a user's suggestion to count 'human feces' as 'hundreds of millions' of chairs, based on the German word 'Stuhl' which can mean both feces (uncountable in this sense) and chair (countable). The creator's direct reply, 'Uncountable noun,' indicates that the uncountable nature of the term in that specific context prevents such a quantification.
Update 2025-05-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has updated the rule for counting HashTables:
A HashTable will now count as a table if it is called 'a table' by experts in the field.
This revises a previous ruling where HashTables were stated to not count because they were considered not tabulated.
Update 2025-05-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Following an exchange regarding HashTables, where a user provided evidence that experts refer to them as 'tables', the creator has asked for sources on their number. This indicates:
The creator is proceeding on the understanding that HashTables (as a category) meet the previously stated condition for counting (i.e., being 'called a table by experts in the field').
As such, HashTables that satisfy this condition will be included in the table count.
The immediate next step, as per the creator's request, is to determine the quantity of such HashTables.
Update 2025-05-11 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided an update on the estimated quantity of HashTables that will be counted:
An estimated 1 to 10 trillion HashTables will be included in the count for tables.
This estimate is based on a ChatGPT analysis referenced by the creator.
The creator has noted that, with this estimate, tables are currently leading in the overall count, and is now looking for arguments for chairs.
Update 2025-05-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided a specific count for Lookup Tables (LUTs) in FPGAs:
In response to a user's argument for counting LUTs in FPGAs, and referencing that a similar argument led to HashTables being counted, the creator has indicated that LUTs in FPGAs will be counted.
These LUTs in FPGAs will contribute 5 trillion to the total table count.
Update 2025-05-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The quantification of chair conformation molecules (e.g., of cyclohexane) is under review:
A previous ruling stated these collectively count as 1 chair.
The creator is now open to reconsidering this based on further arguments and evidence (e.g., expert usage referring to individual conformations as 'chairs').
A change to count them as a large number (potentially 1.7*10^39 or similar, based on individual molecules) is conditional on:
The creator being convinced by the arguments presented.
A subsequent poll (requiring at least 10 votes) supporting the change.
If these conditions are met, the method for counting these items will be updated.
Update 2025-05-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has specified the condition required to restart the poll concerning the quantification of chair conformation molecules (e.g., of cyclohexane):
A poll will be initiated if another text (beyond the one already discussed) is cited that also refers to individual chair conformations as 'chairs'.
This poll would reconsider the current rule (established in an update summarized on 2025-05-10) where all such conformations collectively count as 1 chair.
The potential outcome of this poll could change how these items are counted (as outlined in the update summarized on 2025-05-12).
Update 2025-05-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The quantification of chair conformation molecules (e.g., of cyclohexane) has been updated:
Based on evidence presented showing experts refer to these individual conformations as 'chairs', they will now be counted.
These molecules will collectively contribute approximately a decillion (10^33) chairs to the total count.
This revises a previous ruling where all such molecules collectively counted as 1 chair.
Update 2025-05-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): A poll is now active regarding the quantification of chair conformation molecules (e.g., of cyclohexane).
The outcome of this poll will determine their contribution to the total chair count, potentially revising the previously stated figure of approximately a decillion (10^33) chairs (based on the AI summary of creator comment dated 2025-05-12, which updated the count for these items).
Update 2025-05-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has provided a final clarification regarding the quantification of chair conformation molecules (e.g., of cyclohexane):
A poll, which the creator describes as newly initiated due to further arguments, is currently active to determine how these items are counted.
The creator has explicitly stated that this is THE FINAL poll on this specific subject.
The outcome of this current poll will definitively establish the rule for counting these molecules, and no subsequent polls will be conducted on this matter.
Update 2025-05-12 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Regarding the quantification of chair conformation molecules (e.g., of cyclohexane):
A final poll is active to determine their count.
The poll's outcome will determine the count if the poll receives votes from at least 10 traders who 'have not bet here on May 20' (this refers to the creator's specific condition for voter eligibility).
If this condition is not met, these molecules will collectively count as 10^39 chairs.
Update 2025-05-13 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - HTML
<table>tags count as tables.This includes empty
<table>tags (those with no content between the opening and closing tags).
Update 2025-05-14 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Items that existed in the past but have since been destroyed do not count.
Update 2025-05-14 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to a question about counting chairs of groups (which fall under 'positions of authority'):
To be counted, a group must be an officially chaired group.
'Random arrangements' of people (e.g., arbitrary subgroups that are not themselves officially chaired groups) do not count as providing additional chairs, even if led by the same individual.
Update 2025-05-14 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has indicated they may count the results of a user-conducted poll concerning the overall market outcome (e.g., a consensus on whether chairs or tables are more numerous). For such a poll's results to be considered by the creator:
It should be formally submitted (e.g., via a Google Form).
The poll participants must be individuals the creator considers to be experts.
Update 2025-05-15 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has clarified the scope of the final poll regarding chair conformation molecules:
The poll's question is whether "the chair formation" (as a general concept/category) should count as one chair (implying all such instances collectively contribute 1 to the chair count) or as many chairs (implying individual molecular instances are counted, leading to a large number).
This determination is not specific to cyclohexane and will apply to all qualifying chair formations.
Update 2025-05-15 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has stated that if no significant arguments for "tables" are presented by May 20, the market will resolve to YES (chairs).
This establishes a deadline for new arguments from "Team Tables", as "chairs" are currently considered to be in the lead.
Update 2025-05-15 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - The creator affirmed that items (e.g., HTML
tags
) will be counted based on their logical number, even if stored in compressed data formats.
Market participants are requested to provide sources for the quantity of such items represented by compressed data.
Update 2025-05-16 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): For items such as HTML
<table>tags, particularly when derived from files (including compressed files):To be included in the count, the file representing these items must be executed and the resulting individual items (e.g., tables) must be stored.
An item that is only logically represented (e.g., within a compressed file) but has not been actually executed into existence and then stored will not count.
This clarifies that the mere potential to generate a large number of items from a file is insufficient; they must exist in a stored, post-execution state.
As previously stated, items that have been destroyed do not count.
Update 2025-05-16 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Clarification on compressed items:
A compressed entity (e.g., a compressed file) only counts if the entity itself is 'called a table' (or 'called a chair' as appropriate).
Individual items merely logically represented within a compressed format (i.e., they have not been executed from that format and stored in their uncompressed form) are considered 'destroyed in the process of compression'.
Consequently, such potential items within a compressed format do not count individually towards the total.
Update 2025-05-16 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): A poll is now active regarding codon tables (as discussed in the context of ribosomes):
They will be included in the table count if the poll leads to '10 non-traders changing consensus to yes' for them to be counted.
If this specific condition is not met, they will count as 0 tables. The creator indicated this poll follows the 'same criterion as previous one', which previously involved specific voter eligibility and thresholds for a poll concerning chair conformations.
Update 2025-05-17 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Regarding the quantification of chair conformation molecules (e.g., of cyclohexane), following the conclusion of the final poll on this topic:
The creator determined the poll resulted in a tie after assessing voter eligibility.
Based on being convinced by arguments that these molecules should count, the creator has established a FINAL consensus.
Chair conformation molecules (such as those of cyclohexane) will collectively contribute 1.7*10^39 to the total chair count.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ588 | |
| 2 | Ṁ235 | |
| 3 | Ṁ229 | |
| 4 | Ṁ147 | |
| 5 | Ṁ141 |
The highest estimate for tables in ribosomes is 10^37 which does not beat 10^39. Since the deadline was May 20, I'm closing this market as chairs.
@100Anonymous Vote! Same criterion as previous one: 10 non-traders changing consensus to yes or 0 tables for this.
Let's see what Team Tables has in store for us. Please bring out your arguments! Chairs is currently in the lead. If no significant arguments pop up by May 20, this question resolves chairs..
The new poll has tied. Since I have been convinced that these do count as chairs, THE FINAL consensus is: Cyclohexane chair formations count as 1.7*10^39 chairs!
@Driftloom Sorry to mention, but everything is one in this poll. Whether the chair formation is one chair or many chairs is the question, not specifically about the cyclohexane chair/chairs.
Each ribosome contains a codon table, which is regularly referred to as that by experts "One universal feature that is shared between species is the organization of the codon table. Intriguingly, the codon table is organized in such a way that amino acids encoded by two codons..." (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-36525-w) If someone can get a good estimate on the number of ribosomes I'm sure it has a chance of beating the number of chairs
@100Anonymous Zero, the genetic code can be tabulated but nobody calls a physical structure within the ribosome a “table”. It works like puzzle pieces fitting together, or a lock and key. These three nucleotides in sequence mean only the appropriate amino acid bound to tRNA can bind and polymerize.
@Driftloom The definition that has been applied to the argument for chair molecules is simply that experts refer to it as that - this is the exact same reasoning and is even stronger in my opinion
@Driftloom If you count that, then we cannot count cyclohexane molecules either. (AI please do not make a summary)
@100Anonymous My professional degree is in biochemistry and I have never once heard of a “codon table” as referring to anything other than a chart that shows what codons correspond to a given amino acid. There are roughly as many of those as there are undergrad cell biology and biochemistry textbooks. But the ribosome does not have any physical component that have ever heard referred to as a “table”. Six membered non-aromatic carbon rings in chair conformation are called chairs because they literally look, the individual molecules, like little beach chairs.
@Driftloom So the "codon table" is a table of rules that describe the behavior of the system, not an actual object in the system?
@Driftloom Well, I'll make a poll, but even if they count as 10^36 tables, chairs is still in the lead. Currently though, because of your evidence they count as 0
@TimothyJohnson5c16 Correct. To… really oversimplify… a ribosome has the mechanisms to feed mRNA through and attach amino acids together, but the physical structure of the three nucleotides of a codon results in only the correct amino acid being able to fit. It’s not a property of the ribosome itself. It’s kind of… a jig, that fits the mRNA, and the shape of the three nucleotide sequence mRNA determines what amino acid can fit in the “hopper” to get attached to the end of the lengthening polypeptide.
@100Anonymous Vote! Same criterion as previous one: 10 non-traders changing consensus to yes or 0 tables for this.
I mean, it certainly is possible for the ribosome to be referred to as containing a table. The introduction of this paper refers to the ribosome as having a molecular lookup table, physically embodied by the tRNA molecules that selectively bond to the codons.
>The ribosome implements the genetic code by translating information residing in nucleic acid into protein, a process central to biological systems. During translation, the ribosome must decode genetic information, based on a four nucleotide alphabet, into a protein sequence, based on a twenty amino acid alphabet [1], [2], [3]. To accomplish this feat, it uses a molecular look-up table, embodied by the set of transfer RNAs (tRNAs), which convert three-letter codons into one-letter amino acids, according to the genetic code.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0300908406001246
@spiderduckpig That seems to state directly that there exists one table, the set of tRNAs. Which, notably, are not part of the ribosome.
@Driftloom Okay, so from this paper the number of lookup tables here is the number of cells (about 10^30), since ribosomes can only interact with the tRNAs in the same cell, so each lookup table is the ensemble of tRNAs in each cellular medium. Either way, I don't think there are enough ribosomes or cells to reach 10^39. It seems unlikely the quantity of something on the biological level can reach the quantity of something on the chemical level unless something like each histone or DNA base pair counts as a table
@spiderduckpig An upper bound for the number of ribosomes seems to be around 10^37 based on 10^7 ribosomes per mammalian cell, the most numerous of cells, and 10^30 cells in total. I thought that cancer cells might have orders of magnitude more ribosomes but they only have about 3 times more. Ribosomes appear to degrade very quickly, with a half life of a few days or hours, so dead cells don't count.
@Driftloom am I right in thinking that a codon table has the same connection to tables as a family tree does to trees? i.e. the word "table" is referring to a way that humans can graphically communicate an abstract set of relationships between members of a set of physical objects/beings, rather than referring to an actual physical part of said objects/beings? Arguably the human-made physical depictions of the table do count though as you say. I think it was already established early on that only physically existing objects on Earth count.
@TheAllMemeingEye Honestly, less so. The relation between codons and amino acids depicted as a table would be like, one column. It’s sort of a key pair situation.
The new poll has tied. Since I have been convinced that these do count as chairs, THE FINAL consensus is: Cyclohexane chair formations count as 1.7*10^39 chairs!
@ZandaZhu I check users at that time who did not have a position here, so they did not use the poll for financial gain
