>>jeremy+(OP)
I would argue that 9^9 mentioned in the article for example _is not a number_. It is a method for calculating a number. So most of the article is invalid
>>jbb555+cN
So is 387420489. The method goes, first you take 9, then you multiply 8 by 10 and add that to 9, then you multiply 4 by 100 and add that to what you have...