Power of two
two raised to an integer power

A power of two is a number of the form 2n where n is an integer, that is, the result of exponentiation with the number two as the base and integer n as the exponent. In the fast-growing hierarchy, 2n is exactly equal to
f
1
n
(
1
)
{\displaystyle f_{1}^{n}(1)}
. In the Hardy hierarchy, 2n is exactly equal to
H
ω
n
(
1
)
{\displaystyle H_{\omega {n}}(1)}
.
Powers of two with non-negative exponents are integers: 20 = 1, 21 = 2, and 2n is n 2s multiplied together. The first ten powers of 2 for non-negative values of n are:
1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, ... (sequence A000079 in the OEIS)
By comparison, powers of two with negative exponents are fractions: for positive integer n, 2−n is one half multiplied by itself n times. Thus the first few negative powers of 2 are 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, etc. Sometimes these are called inverse powers of two because each is the multiplicative inverse of a positive power of two.
Computer science
Most computers use a binary (base two) representation of numbers, a number system in which each place represents a power of 2, and the only possible binary digits ("bits") are 0 and 1. Powers of two are thus ubiquitous in computing and computer science.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Power of two” is two raised to an integer power. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Power, raised and integer, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “two raised to an integer power” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 10, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1136880. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Power of two”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Power of two primary sources, Power of two archive and Power research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Power of two”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Power of two” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.