Tell me if I'm stating the obvious but is it simply due to an infinite number of orders of magnitude that there's the possibility we haven't looked at one high enough (because there's always an order of magnitude higher) to see the pattern? Or am I just inexperienced and don't know what I'm talking about?

I honestly can't say I've ever been as excited about maths than when reading this post. I think it has much the same appeal to me as programming which is that I can manipulate things and solve problems in an infinite number of ways and that it's (relatively) accessible to do so i.e you don't need expensive lab…

Even so, I think it's good to try not to assume the reader knows what you're thinking when you're breaching definitions. I want to point out that I didn't realise this and thought that in some way standard from was exempt from the term: in terms of smaller numbers.