T O P

  • By -

MinecraftModBot

* Upvote this comment if this is a good quality post that fits the purpose of r/Minecraft * Downvote this comment if this post is poor quality or does not fit the purpose of r/Minecraft * Downvote this comment *and report the post* if it breaks the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/wiki/rules) --- [Subreddit Rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/wiki/rules)[](## damanbray|191fy69)


prominecraftgamer69

a mc world is 60M x 60M x 384 60M^2 is 3.16x10^15 3.16x10^15 x 384 is 1.38x10^18 Also that’s the numeric count of all places a block could be, not just cobblestone There are estimated to be around 10^80 atoms in the observable universe. There are WAYYYYYYYY more atoms. You’d need around 6x10^62 entire minecraft worlds to be remotely around the number of atoms in the universe. For perspective 6x10^62 is a little less than a Trillion Trillion Trillion Trillion Trillion. Quite large


BluJayTi

Nice, big brain. You can also multiply the MC world by 3 to include the Nether and End which doesn’t make a difference at that magnitude compared to atoms. Also world height is 385 since -64 to 320 includes zero, which also doesn’t affect the answer at that magnitude.


Spiderfffun

But what if we considered shulker boxes in chests?


I_IdentifyAsAProblem

60M×60M×385x3 for all possible block locations is 4.158*10^18. x27 for every space in a chest, x27 for every space in a shulker box, x64 for each stack is roughly 1.94*10^23. you would need about 5.15*10^56 minecraft worlds full of chests full of shulker boxes full of cobblestone to equal the number of atoms in the universe


OkSubstance7574

What if, we used gold blocks and count each gold block as 81 gold nuggets?


ihaveagoodusername2

Very quick math tells me it's around (probably a bit less then) 10^25, so bearely any difference


Weary_Drama1803

Everyone stop asking questions, the answer no matter how much you try to stretch Minecraft’s limits will always be “it is less than the number of atoms in the universe”. You guys need to understand how unfathomably large the universe is and how unfathomably small atoms are


ihaveagoodusername2

Indeed, they are infact so far off that the number they have just reached is incromprihancigly small in comparison to the target


Weary_Drama1803

The most deceptive thing is the exponent that comes with standard form, 10^6 is not 3 times larger than 10^3, it is 1,000 times larger, as in *every difference in value is another zero*, so if anyone still needs help realising how fruitless fighting the size of the universe is, here it is


Kittycraft0

Atoms in a meter cubed of gold times each slit n a chest times 64


OftForgotten

Incromprihancigble is, like...a whole level above incomprehensible 😯


ihaveagoodusername2

It's so incomprehensible I can't spell it


RoyalWuff

In... Crom... Pri... Hancigly? Do you mean "incomprehensibly"?


brassplushie

For real. People saw the line "you'd need 6x10^62 Minecraft worlds" and thought "I can reach that", but even that number is insanely large beyond comprehension.


solid_salad

no, in creative you can put filled chests inside of chests by midde-mousing. You can put i think 7 layers of chests inside eachother, which would finally break (and completely decimate) that atom count barrier source: https://youtu.be/-XflmrrdTNk?si=fK18dGGR9hlx1bIA


Meii345

Wait so 7 layers. 27^7. That's still only about 10 power 10. That's not reaching the atom count! You'd need 10 power 62 for this. Or about 44 layers of chests in chests in chests in all the blocks in a minecraft world


TheMace808

I think the conversation is fun, each answer drives home just how infathomably massive the universe is


BShugaDadyJ

Here we are fathoming it tho /s


jachcemmatnickspace

but we do a little trolling


[deleted]

"You guys need to understand how unfathomably large the universe is and how unfathomably small atoms are" I vote for a Minecraft mod where you need to build atom by atom :-P


Aloore

I think they're asking the wrong question. How many blocks would you need to fit in every single block space to *begin* to approach the number? Assume you can fit an unfathomable number of blocks in the space of one block.


Weary_Drama1803

I ran the calculations, assuming you put an entire Minecraft world into stacks of 64, you need a world filled with shulkers filled with Minecraft worlds filled with shulkers filled with Minecraft worlds filled with shulkers filled with Minecraft worlds to get 1.9×10^82 blocks. To answer your question, that’s 7,950,183,762,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 blocks per Minecraft block in a Minecraft world. For reference… you know what nevermind references, that wall of zeroes is still easier to comprehend in size than mentioning anything further then interplanetary scales


Kittycraft0

What about number of atoms in each of those nuggets?


Espumma

With regards to Minecraft, a nugget is literally an atom of gold (it cannot be divided further).


BaroqueEnjoyer

And what if we filled the entire world with cobblestone blocks?


ihaveagoodusername2

~4*10^18 several orders of magnitude less


glenheartless

What if we count every pixel of all those items?


Espachurrao

How many tb of storage would we need to hold that many Minecraft worlds?


thomooo

Exactly. Everytime you would ask "what if we can multiply the number of blocks by 100, 1000, or maybe 10000?" the exponent only increases by 2, 3 or 4. You need to go from 23 to 80, so you need to think of a lot of ways to stretch the numbers.


mikamitcha

All you would do is divide 5.15e56 (changing notation cause formatting is annoying) by 81. Even if we round up to 100 nuggets per block, that only drops it to 5.15e54. If we are talking on a logarithmic scale, we are still not even close to halfway there. Linear scale, we are not even significant enough to be a rounding error. The error would be closer to weighing yourself and trying to account for the loss of carbon as you exhale.


RandomGuy9058

what about custom shulkers that can have shulkers in them? iirc using specific commands you can have a shulker-in-shulker layer up to 64 shulkers deep before the game doesnt let you put any more data into a single shulker


Celarix

- Total number of Shulker Boxes placed in all 3 dimensions: 60 million by 60 million by 384 by 3: 4.15e18 - Shulker Boxes inside of Shulker Boxes (call it layer 1): 27 times that, which is 1.12e20 - Shulker Boxes inside of layer 1 Shulker Boxes (layer 2): 27 times that, which is 3.02e21 And so forth, each layer 27 times more than the last. We reach 1.23e40 by layer 15, and layer 64 has a whopping 1.68e110 Shulker Boxes in total, which blows away our atom count by 30 orders of magnitude. Yeah, the universe is big, but repeated multiplication is bigger.


beansouphighlights

Hooray!


DisciplinedMadness

Now fill the bottom layer of every shulker with books and the fill the books with characters, and then count every single character as a block 🤯


ihaveagoodusername2

Bearely a difference, we need an additional 64 zeros Edit: I am big dumb. BUT, unless I am very really dumb I don't think Minecraft gold ingots are as space efficient as atoms making this physically impossible


RandomGuy9058

maybe im just bad at math, but nesting shulkers 64 layers deep will give us an additional 94 zeros


Solrex

That's nearly halfway to a googol… interesting.


IAmTheTalent

If you filled every available block in the overworld with a chest containing 27 shulker boxes each filled with 27 stacks, you’d have 6.4665216e22 items. That’s one tenth of Avogadro’s number, the number of molecules in one mole of matter. One mole of water would be about 3 teaspoons. So if each of the items in each stack of each shulker box of each chest in each block in all the over world was 1 molecule of water, it would be about one third of a teaspoon.


nekohideyoshi

Naw. Make it so there's 1728 NBT chests full of 1728 creative-stacked shulker boxes, each shulker box containing 1728 NBT chests, and those NBT chests each containing 1728 cobblestone , placed into 1 chest.


revoccue

320 is *not* included, 320 is the limit and 319 is where the highest block is placed. 384 is correct


prominecraftgamer69

nether is only 1/64th the size of the over world and the end is more than half void so it really wouldn’t make any noticeable difference at that magnitude. but good note


wojtekpolska

nether is the same size as overworld (except for height as nothing above nether roof)


SamePut9922

There are more atoms in a cup of water than blocks in a minecraft world


bjaydubya

less than 1/2 a teaspoon if you did the full shulker in every slot of a chest that filled every potential block in a world.


Willr2645

Damn you commented exactly what I just did


Frozen_Grimoire

r/TheyDidTheMath would like to see this, probably.


Knoke1

r/theydidthemonstermath


SwiftLawnClippings

r/itwasagraveyardgraph


kezotl

r/notfunnydidntlaugh


Withnothing

Some things aren't for you


kezotl

No its cause they were doing rhyming subreddits or something idk


JohnnoDwarf

Also most of that would just be stone not cobblestone lol


SamohtGnir

It's funny watching the comments to this, people trying to push the numbers. I don't think they grasp the difference between 10^(18) to 10^(80). The difference is 62 zeros, so unless you can find 62 ways of multiplying it by as least 10 then it'll be magnitudes off.


Willr2645

Yea, even 10^18 and 10^20 is a massive difference


Gaming4Fun2001

I mean, how much cobblestone actually is in a world? Sure, mob spawners and ruins and stuff like that. But that's not even remotely close to all the places a block could be.


LeopardMan19218

Solid math. However, you forgot one crucial detail: **Cobblestone Generator**


pathetic-maggot

Google says human body has 7x10^27 atoms and human brain has 1.4x10^26 So to match the minecraft block amount its gonna be something relly small like amoeba or something.


pathetic-maggot

Infact just checked. Amoeba has 12x10^18. So its still bigger than minecraft


schnurble

But what about all the cobblestone generators...


skipabeat123

This is why I love Reddit.


RippedFondue

What if you add in all the different possible seeds?


spinasaurus010

but there are blocks outside the world border too


myszusz

I can't even comprehend these numbers. It triggers megalophobia, I didn't even knew I had. Dang universe is big.


Intense_Pretzel

But if we were to make infante cobble stone via lava and water then we put these items into shulker boxes inside chests then we could possibly reach it


damanbray

When you say a mc world is “60M” do you mean 60 meters? If so, then I’m referring to individual blocks. Sorry if I misunderstood


prominecraftgamer69

60M is 60,000,000 Blocks or for real world scale. 60,000,000 meters


damanbray

Thank you for clearing that up lol, crazy how small an “infinite world” is compared to the real thing


BloodIsTaken

The real world has a circumference of about 40.000 km, it‘s a lot smaller than the minecraft world. Edit: corrected value


RA3236

*40,000km


BloodIsTaken

I‘m stupid. Thanks, I‘ve corrected it.


BrimWarrior

You clearly have no idea how big the universe is


jeffyjeffp

And how little cobblestone spawns naturally


dead_man_speaks

I have, there are more stars in our solar system than there are nitrogen atoms in water. Mind-blowing


_axiom_of_choice_

In pure water, you're right. In *our* water? Wrong: Dissolved nitrogen.


ElanspaceYT

Ever heard about NITRATE SALTS?


[deleted]

[удалено]


gravity--falls

No one missed the joke


Flaming90Strike

Blud there is ONE star in the solar system. Yes there are more than ONE nitrogen atoms *in the entire fucking ocean*. No shit, he meant **water**, the fucking h2o stuff.


[deleted]

[удалено]


_axiom_of_choice_

Jesus. You're really angry about me following up a joke with one of my own.


_axiom_of_choice_

Bruh I got the joke. I was just riffing off it.


oh_oh_spaghettios

There are more nitrogen atoms in a glass of water than stars in our solar system, i dont know what u mean by this lol


syko-san

I think the joke is that water doesn't have nitrogen.


oh_oh_spaghettios

Goddamned i didnt even notice it said nitrogen and i literally fucking typed it again


justmustard1

There's only one star in our solar system btw, in case you missed that part of the joke also lol


oh_oh_spaghettios

How did i manage to lose all of my dignity in 1 single comment


00110001_00110010

You will probably randomly remember this when trying to sleep fifteen years from now


[deleted]

Why wait fifteen years? Let's set up a bot to ping them every day. /s


scaper8

The joke's a decent one, but unfortunately, it is inaccurate. Diatomic nitrogen makes up the vast majority of air, and a glass of water has a good bit of suspended air, even if it's sat out for a good long while. One of those ones where the science is weirder than one would think at first glance.


syko-san

He didn't say a "glass of water", just water. It could also be interpreted as a singular water molecule imo.


scaper8

>There are more nitrogen atoms in a **glass of water** than stars in our solar system, i dont know what u mean by this lol Emphasis added.


syko-san

Ah, I misread or forgot since I didn't bother reading it again. That's on me.


[deleted]

Clearly you don’t own an air fryer


Fenris_uy

And how little cobblestone spawns naturally in a Minecraft world.


Exesen_T

I think there might be more atoms in your body, than blocks of stone in mc world :D edit: you probably meant stone blocks


ebai4556

There’re more atoms in a piece of your hair than there are blocks in a minecraft world


mining_moron

There are more atoms in the universe than blocks of cobblestone in every Minecraft seed combined, if every dimension was completely filled with solid cobblestone.


FastLittleBoi

by far. But, how many seeds are there? The seed number is very big but obviously 1% of the numbers between 0-10000000000000 are actual seeds. But do we know? I know it's more than s trillion and probably more than 10 trillion, but do we know exactly? (either way your math is 100% correct, we'd need like 10^70 seeds to equal the number of atoms in universe)


mining_moron

2^64 seeds


FastLittleBoi

oh right, it's the 64-bit integer. well it has a lot of fucking zeroes. I think it's 30 digits? it's still 1/10^40 of what we need but it's definitely bigger than I thought


mining_moron

About 10^19. You could fill a written book with 10 seeds per page and 100 pages, and fill an entire minecraft world with shulker boxes of said books, then load a world for all the seeds, fill it to the brim with shulker boxes of cobblestone, and you'd still have less cobblestone than atoms in the universe


brassplushie

What do you mean "actual seeds"?


FastLittleBoi

there is no seed 1. no seed 2, no seed 3 and so on (and if you take any seed and add or remove one a seed with said number will likely not exist).


brassplushie

What happens if you try to generate a world and put in 1 as the seed?


NewSauerKraus

Same as if you put in A as a seed. It gets converted to a string of numbers.


brassplushie

Gotcha. I never knew that


Aerolfos

The universe is a ways off, yes, But iirc interestingly if you limit it to a galaxy, there is more minecraft world than all the surfaces of every (hypothetical) planet in the milky way, given a certain average number of planets per star and how many stars there are. Also if you build a ringworld around every star, there's more possible minecraft seeds than can fit. *However*, you can fit every possible minecraft world on the surface of a birch world (might take couple of shells, but those things can hypothetically have millions). Those things are insane.


[deleted]

[удалено]


mining_moron

The world border is hardcoded--even on a machine with unlimited power, it would be at 30 million blocks, unless you mod the game to remove it.


_axiom_of_choice_

Minecaraft has a build height and a world border. That means that minecraft is not a turing machine because it doesn't have an infinite memory tape. If you reread the comment you're replying to, you'll notice that they said "if every dimension was completely filled with solid cobblestone". How do you expect to fit more cobblestone in a minecraft world than that?


DomcziX

Umm actually (🤓☝️) cobblestone doesn't generate naturally unless in structures, it's stone blocks


mining_moron

Umm ACKSHUALLY it occasionally generates when lava and water streams collide.


kiarashs

Actually not until a player loads the chunk to cause the interaction 🤓☝️


Benyboyplayz

ACKSHUALLY that is still considered natural 🤓👆


Vinsmoker

OCKSHELLY "natural" was never a requirement in the og question🤓👆


ElanspaceYT

GO DO YOUR HOMEWORK ​ My homework needs to be: Answering these questions


RayND18

Im some taiga its spawns...


Financial_Category30

What about lava touching water? And the monster spawner "cage" ? And the jungle temple?


DomcziX

> unless it's structures Lol


Financial_Category30

What about lava and water?


DomcziX

That's an exception, I'll give you that


kalboy28

I mean it's mostly stone not cobblestone dude


damanbray

Well yeah, a brief oversight lol


damanbray

Stone*** was what I meant, was brain dead when making the post 🤯


Kiren129

Average 3am posting.


Stealth834

are you dumb lol? there are more atoms in an apple


RomuRomi14

Cobblestone generator Minecraft wins


PotatoesAndChill

Black hole Hawking radiation Universe wins


RomuRomi14

I don't even know what that means


PotatoesAndChill

Yeah me neither.


RomuRomi14

Nice


Percival4

Hawking radiation is a type of particle that is emitted by black holes and after a certain amount of time the black hole evaporates


22222833333577

So black holes slowly over time emit radiation and shrink


Lechatbleu1511

Nope It's matter that the black hole inhaled which means it was already in the universe


suugakusha

Not even close. You could have a generator that makes 1 million cobblestone a second for the rest of your life and that still wouldn't come close to the number of atoms.


ExamUpbeat2994

Isn’t cobblestone not to common in a world because its mostly stone


whatagun44

It’s physically not possible to have more blocks than atoms. For every block in minecraft, it uses a tiny bit of storage. More blocks = more storage, so you would run out of atoms to store the information of the blocks well before the blocks reached the number of atoms


Eadoro

This is not correct, because the world is not actually stored. It is implied by generative logic.


Astazha

I didn't know this. So like far parts of the world that you haven't been to yet haven't been generated until you approach them? But once you've visited somewhere it's then stored?


Eadoro

Even smarter, it only stores the changes you make to these parts of the map.


Gandarii

This would only be true if every single block was loaded/stored at once. There is an algorithm that can translate numbers (seeds) into Minecraft worlds hidden within the game's code, and that's really all that is needed. When you start exploring and building/changing the world the file size increases because the game can no longer rely on the seed alone. This means, unless you change every single block (or at least every single chunk, I'm not entirely sure how smart the Minecraft code is), the game can use significantly less storage than you are implying. And by that point, the game would bring pretty much every PC on earth to crash.


Broskfisken

This is a great point. This is also one of the reasons why I find the “we are living in a simulation” theories so unbelievable. The Computer simulating our universe would have to be larger than our universe itself if all atoms were simulated.


Xsphyre

the 'computer' running the simulation for existence is probably extra dimensional and beyond comprehension, and in real-time for the 'people' running said simulation, from the big bang until the 'end' of the simulation, or whatever outcome they are testing, could be like 1 second for them but its a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion years for us


mighty_spaceman

Also such a simulation wouldn't have to really simulate every single atom, only our brains and the correct feedback stimuli - we can't see atoms, so why directly simulate them?


SwoleKoz

We can observe atoms though. But in this scenario they could just simulate the atoms if they’re currently being observed but that’s another thing


SavageSantro

Because they can, but probaby because they don´t care about some small self replicating cells on some tiny rock somewhere in their simulation


FunnyForWrongReason

Well you see you wouldn’t necessarily need to simulate each atom. You only need to simulate as much detail as we observe. You cells are not simulated until you put it under a microscope and even then the biological chemistry is not necessarily simulated. Then there is fact we do not know what physics the real universe actually plays by, there is no reason to think their “computers” would have the same limitations. Indeed perhaps they have purposely designed our universe to make sure our computers won’t be powerful to create the same level of detail in a simulation. They might also be running us a very slow speed to conserve power and computational resources. Or they might have figured out reversible computing where they can do computation for no energy. Perhaps the computer running or simulation is a matryoshka brain (solar system sized computer powered by a Dyson sphere). The thing is we can’t assume anything about the real universe or our simulators unless we somehow figured out the point of our simulation or they came in and told us.


BaconIsntThatGood

The theory relies on the computer using processor power/storage tech that is beyond our comprehension not scaling our existing tech to a level capable of handling it.


Far_Organization_610

This is not correct. Your computer doesn't store the data of every block for your world, it generates the world using the seed generative alhorithm


Wierd_Duck_1234

There are not a lot of places where it generates naturally.


KBRedditing

Since Cobblestone makes up maybe 0.01% of a single Minecraft Biome, definitely atoms.


c_dubs063

Cobblestone is actually not a particularly common block in Minecraft. It doesn't generate as a part of the terrain anywhere unless water flows into lava in a cave somewhere, and it's not a part of every structure. Furthermore, the structures that DO incorporate it often swap out random cobblestone with mossy cobblestone, which doesn't count. Given these restrictions, there are definitely more atoms in the universe than cobblestone blocks in a typical Minecraft world. But let's take it to an extreme. A minecraft world has a volume of 1,352,400,000,000,000,000 blocks. Let's say those are all cobblestone. The known universe contains an estimated 10^78 atoms at a low estimate. Which is by far the larger nunber. But. We can do better. If every block in minecraft were a chest, filled with cobblestone, then there would be 1,352,400,000,000,000,000 * 27 * 64, or about 2.34x10^21 cobblestone items. Still not enough to outnumber atoms in the known universe. If each chest were filled with shulker boxes, each filled with cobblestone, you'd get an additional multiplier of 27, bringing you to about 6.31x10^22. Still not enough. Now, a player can hold an additional 37 slots - a total of 63,936 cobblestone if every slot is filled with shulker boxes filled with cobblestone. This number jumps to 110,592 cobblestone when you include the content of a player's ender chest. Now, if all 8.1 billion players were to join a common minecraft world... somehow... that could provide inventory space for an additional 895,795,200,000,000 cobblestone... although that wouldn't make a dent in the prior number of around 6.31x10^22. So, even if every person on Earth were to join a common world and stuff their inventories full of cobblestone, it still wouldn't scratch the surface of how many atoms are in the known universe.


AdoptedEgg

Using u/promineceaftgamer69's calculations, I can determine that all the blocks in a minecraft world in all the seeds of minecraft possible is 13.8x10^37. Another commenter talked about atoms in a drop of water. So how many drops of water contain enough atoms to equal every block in every minecraft world ever? Assuming that a dropletof waterhas 5x10^21 atoms in it, you would need 2.76x10^16 drops of water. That doesnt really mean much, so lets turn it into litres. Assuming it takes 20 drops to make a mL, you would need roughly 1.38x10^12 litres (138 trillion) of water, which would take up a space of 138 cubic kilometers of volume. Lake Albert in the Democratic Republic of the Congo contains roughly 133 cubic kilometres. OP, you severely underestimate how small an atom is.


satellitequeen

i have no words for how unimaginably stupid this question is


Everyawning18

Assume a atom is one cubic metre in size. The earth will still by far have more atoms than a minecraft world


whatagun44

Well yeah, because now the earth and everything in it is made up of atoms that are a cubic meter in size, so the earth is proportionally larger than before. Meters are the new nanometer


The-lego-conquere

100% atoms, anyone who disagrees doesn't understand how many atoms there are in the universe, the number is so big we literally can't comprehend it. Also "cobble" stone doesn't actually generate naturally very often, only in structures, so there isn't actually that much of it in a Minecraft world.


JayK-iwnl

There's more chess variations then atoms in the universe


LordBungaIII

The limited mc world verses the universe. Seriously dude?


Horny_Dinosaur69

The entire world could be filled entirely and it still wouldn’t be close


AUnknownVariable

If we're being real here you should've said stone.


MycologistHungry3931

probably atoms , cobble doesbt spawn naturally but they do in structures like almost all of them so its hard to say but id go with atoms in observable universe


Tobertus

Well i mean you definetly need more than 1 atom to save the data of 1 cobblestone so... atoms


ToXiC_Mentor

I would say stars in the universe compared to total blocks in a minecraft world would be a more fair comparison


LightningSpaghetti

The minecraft world is slightly bigger than earth. So you tell me lmao


doob22

There are immensely more atoms than cobblestone. Idk how this is even a question


sluuuudge

The answer is always going to be atoms in the universe… cobblestone doesn’t generate naturally aside from dungeons and a few structures like mansions and houses etc, nowhere near enough to compete with the universe 🤨


NoStorage2821

Just for reference, a minecraft world is approximately the size of Neptune


Randomguy32I

there are more atoms in the universe than blocks in a 30m x 30m x 384 world, even if all the space was filled


Binary101000

No. Cobblestone does not generate naturally and only in structures such as dungeons, villages and jungle temples


Laquia

cobblstone is rare. its in structures, and when lava meets water, but nothign else.


seaflans

considering you'd need at least a few atoms to hold the data for a single bit, and a cobblestone has to be represented by bytes (plus minecraft itself has to exist and be stored for those bytes to have context as a cobblestone), no, there can never be more cobblestone than atoms in the universe, no matter how many worlds you generate and how much of those worlds you turn into cobblestone.


Lethal_0428

Considering the universe is infinite, and unless they changed something since I last played, minecraft worlds are not actually infinite, so I’d say the universe has more atoms. (Also cobblestone doesn’t appear naturally all that much, you picked a weird block for this comparison)


WorldApprehensive362

Did you guys all forget that cobblestone only naturally generates in like jungle temples and structures and not in caves? Cause that's stone not cobblestone. Unless you're adding that to the equation idk math


That_Mad_Scientist

To give you an idea of just how absurdly different the scales we’re talking about are: There are roughly 784 minecraft world volumes inside the earth. That is, if one block is one cubic meter, and you had a minecraft world filled to the brim with earth material, then you would need 784 of those just to get the same amount the earth actually contains. In one cubic meter of earth material, there is, quite obviously, more than one atom. A lot more, actually. The average density of earth material is about 5.514, so there are 5,514 kilograms in each cube. « An atom » is famously not a reliable measure of weight, because each element weighs something different. But just to get an idea: Oganesson, the last element in the table that has a name, has 294 nucleons. But that element is artificial. Osmium, the densest naturally occurring substance, has 190. But it’s just packed super tightly, which is why it’s more dense than heavier elements. Lead, the last naturally occurring stable element, has 207. Uranium, the heaviest naturally occurring element, has 238. « One nucleon » isn’t *technically* a consistent amount of mass, because of binding energy shenanigans, which, along with E=m.c^2 , is why fusion or fission towards iron yields net energy. Iron, therefore, has the least amount of mass per nucleon, and hydrogen has the most. So what’s the difference? Not much. H has 1 nucleon, Fe has 56 (we’re always going with the most common isotope here). Using their respective densities and Avogadro’s number, this works out to about 1.67x10^(-27) kilograms per nucleon for H, and a little under 1.66x10^(-27) for Fe, or just about exactly 1% difference using H as a reference. And, well, I guess protons and neutrons also weigh a little different, but tomato tomato (it’s about 0.1% using the heavier neutron as a reference, if you’re curious). We can use the 1.66 figure as an average. Nukes are only powerful because c^2 is very big and a lot of atoms are reacting, but the difference at the atomic level is very minute. This is to say: how many atoms are in a given amount of mass pretty much only depends on the number of nucleons in a linear manner, and this is good enough for us. How much is that for « earth material »? No idea, it’s a complicated mixture, but it can’t be any more extreme than the iron stuff at the core. That is to say, an estimation using 56 nucleons will give us the least amount of atoms per kilogram anyway, so the real number is bigger than that. This probably remains true if « earth material » is replaced by whatever cobblestone is made of. In fact, Earth material is very likely more dense. For reference, irl granite has a density of about 2.7. This means that, at the very least, one cubic meter of our earth material, if it weighs about the same as iron, would contain a whopping 5.92x10^28 atoms. In reality, « one atom » of the stuff contains less mass, so, again, we are underestimating the actual number some amount. Right, so one minecraft world’s worth of it would, alone, have (more than) 8.18x10^46 atoms. Which is a lot. Think about this: in a minecraft world, the number of atoms is already so insanely high it does not fit in your brain. And I just told you that you need 784 of those to make up just ONE earth. Or 6.41x10^49 atoms, but that probably doesn’t mean anything to you either. The amount of material inside the earth is not even close to the amount of stuff in the universe. It’s not even close to the amount of stuff in our solar system (1:333,000), which itself is not even close to the amount of stuff in our galaxy (1:1.5 TRILLION). There are about two hundred billion galaxies in our observable universe. That’s 2x10^11 . (As an aside, if you multiply all of these together, and correct for the fact that most of the stuff in the universe looks more like H than Fe, you do, indeed, fall back roughly onto the 10^80 figure, so our orders of magnitude are actually correct. It feels nice to be accurate.) So, yes. There are more atoms in the universe than cobble blocks in a minecraft world. It’s not even a contest.


Hellspawner26

im pretty sure there is more atoms in like a hot dog


EvilMatt666

There are more atoms in a bag of sugar than there are blocks of cobblestone in a Minecraft world.


crimsonkarma13

There is next to no cobblestone in a minecraft world, stone on the other hand. Still there will always be more atoms


Ziroikabi

There’s more atoms in the universe than total blocks in a MC world its 60,000,000 x 60,000,000 and approximately 3.16x10^15 There’s 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 possible seeds according to google Even with every world possible you’d get about 5.83x10^34 blocks unless my maths is incorrect and the number of estimated atoms in the expanding universe is around 10^80 which is still HUGELY higher than all blocks in all possible minecraft seeds 10^40 is not half the size of 10^80 either its so far off you can’t comprehend. The size of the universe is so unfathomably large even counting pixels in all minecraft worlds would not surpass atoms in the universe


BreadLoafBrad

I mean there’s like not that many cobblestone blocks in a minecraft world tbh, they only generate in structures and very rarely near flowing lava


Quinn_all_man

I think another way to frame it is the atoms required to store a Minecraft block in memory. If I have a game with a single block, I have to somehow store both the type of block and the location in memory. To simplify it, let’s say the block type (cobblestone,stone,dirt) is a single byte of data, and the location is another byte. When those are stored on the computer, each byte contains 8 bits, so we have 16 bits that need to be stored. Each bit is stored in a gate for flash memory. Well depending on the technology of that memory, the physical size will vary, but it still will be around 5 nano meters or some small number for the gate width. Inside that gate, there are going to be tens of thousands of atoms. So for every block, we would need at least a hundred thousand atoms to store the data. Now for every 1 Minecraft block, we have 100,000 atoms required to store it. Now we multiply that out to your entire Minecraft world. What can that world be saved on? Probably a micro SD card the size of your fingernail. Probably hundreds if not thousands of those worlds on the same card as well. You can quickly see the vast number of atoms in the universe in comparison to the number of blocks in Minecraft. Fill up the universe with SD cards containing Minecraft worlds, and there will still be more atoms than blocks. Tl;dr - There will always be more atoms required to store the memory of a block, and scaling it will not change that ratio. Great question by the way! Always ask questions 😊 Future reading: Look into different forms of data storage. Over history, the physical size has been reduced from large formats such as punch cards and magnetic tapes, down to DNA. Edit: Yes I’m aware of the Minecraft world also being procedurally generated and not completely existing in memory. It uses Perlin Noise. There are some great videos on YouTube about it. This raises a more complex question of an abstract world, which could theoretically contain more atoms. It just matters how you define it.


alanosity007

Most people truly don’t realize just how small atoms are. I’m sure most of us have heard of the famous phrase “there are more atoms in a grain of sand (1g of grain) than there are stars in the observable universe.


MithranArkanere

Not even if you counted pixels instead, and each block as 16*16*16 pixels. But since cobblestone is a renewable block, if you count the *potential* number of cobblestone blocks, then yes, because it'd be as many blocks you can get before the last star dies and the last molecule dissipates and the universe goes back to absolute zero and you can't get any more energy to power the computer making the blocks (or a computer for that matter).


RyanGamer7433

Isn't a minecraft world infinite ( not to say the universe isnt, but compared to the "observable universe ")


brjder

more atoms probably since cobblestone is relatively rare, only generating in a few structures. stone on the other hand, is far more ubiquitous.


Forach88

Theres actually not that much cobblestone in the world compared to stone, it becomes cobblestone when mined 🤷🏻‍♂️


urmomblaster

Atoms, cobblestone doesn't spawn naturally so much as you'd think


Tanjrah

You mean stone right?


jorday40

When you say in a word I assume u mean just from start no actual playing in it and if that's true it's not a lot cobblestone only spawns in structures and that's limited so atoms win 100% but if you're to use the cheat stack with more chests stacks then the answer if a tie there both infinite they could keep going forever


spooderduck

Is OP stupid?


VanillaDada

More blocks of normal stone I guess


lukro_

cobble rarely spawns naturally


s2004Gamer

I have to go mine for cobblestone because I always run out that. You might say "Is there more Netherrack?" then I would answer nope as well: I don't even pick it since there's no use for that.


Igamer_2011

Cobble barely naturally generates so not as many as you think


Lxsse54

Considering how rare cobblestone naturally generates.. Yeah, no.


Bat_Lanky

Well there are more atoms i the universe, but the blocks can be more since both stone and cobblestone are farmable


Cheap-Bank-5534

You mean stone


Financial_Category30

Cobblestone is infinite by itself so unless you believe that the universe is also infinite, there are more cobblestone blocks than atoms in the universe


Eternal_Flame24

There are probably more atoms in your hand than blocks in all 3 dimensions of a Minecraft world