@_muynee: 🏰🧚🏻‍♀️🌷⛅️✨#banahills #danang

nghiện với hài
nghiện với hài
Open In TikTok:
Region: VN
Thursday 14 August 2025 13:40:25 GMT
2009407
157916
441
6155

Music

Download

Comments

.quynhanh15th2
cục tạ biết đi 🐕‍🦺 :
được kh còn hai tấm nữa 😍
2025-08-15 02:42:05
2631
bun.dau73qb
Bún Đậu :
đây hẻ=)))
2025-08-15 03:17:08
661
heo81185
Heo :
người ta chụp như tiên nữ tao chụp như yêu quái
2025-08-15 04:23:19
247
hglinh.097
Linh :
T xin if váy với ạ
2025-08-15 00:09:01
7
_nq.hf_
𖦹𝘶𝘯_𝘪𝘯𝘯.˚ :
Ủa sao lúc tui đi banahill đà nẵng kco thấy mấy góc này z😭
2025-08-17 07:01:48
12
sttkhois
Phố xưa 💥 :
ời ơi cái nhạc với ng trong ảnh nó thơ:>
2025-08-15 00:17:49
45
kim_juhoon0811
d :
Chị ơi,cho em xin ảnh cuối dk ạ.
2025-08-17 07:53:01
5
user_emyen
em cún :
t chụp đc mấy này sĩ cả đời luôn
2025-08-17 15:19:49
7
thuyanh_1310
Thuy Anh :
tr ơi khủng bố ảnh 2
2025-08-17 14:37:17
5
anhdendeyeuemz
Người Dùng :
Ng đẹp và cảnh đẹp 😇
2025-08-15 14:35:11
5
lnn9410
Lùnn :
tấm nào cũng đẹp mà riêng tấm thứ 2 đỉnhh vãiii ò😍
2025-08-15 13:52:10
10
linhduongnguyen61
linhduongnguyen61 :
Ngta đi thì chụp kiểu sang chảnh, toi chụp muốn sang chấn tâm lí ^^
2025-08-15 11:32:47
11
lumies.vn
LUMIÉ VN :
Ui váy bên shop 💗💗💗
2025-08-17 10:28:11
12
woaiizh.07
ʜᴏàɪ💤 :
ước đc đi chs🥺🥺
2025-08-14 15:24:45
11
cas_2219
🐟 :
vừa ngủ dậy đã gặp ngay tình đầu
2025-08-15 03:25:01
7
ttxuananh2010
𝓧𝓾â𝓷 𝓪𝓷h 🐯 :
Sau này cưới mình sẽ mặc bộ váy cưới y chang v ko bt dc ko ta
2025-08-15 05:40:40
7
yeu_karatedo
CLB HVT bá nhất karate 🥋 :
đẹp xĩu
2025-08-15 07:57:21
5
haiiquyeen
_haii quynn_ :
nơi đó rất đẹp 💗
2025-08-15 04:02:02
13
iraly79
Ira :
Ko lạnh à
2025-08-15 09:07:09
6
jerrydaily_
⃟ :
chụp máy gì đẹp quá b oi
2025-08-15 04:48:08
57
dtnu27
nha uyen :
nhìn chỗ này quen lắm
2025-08-15 03:11:22
7
iuumerp
bảo bảo là mặt trời nhỏ :
bà đi vào đợt nào mà nhìn ít ng vậy ạ😭
2025-08-15 02:54:24
7
usernamelopduphong
Come on,Don't leave me💫 :
xin ảnh t3 dc hog bà
2025-08-15 01:08:59
5
tsong.org
sᴏɴɢ :
cảnh đẹp hơn nàng 😍
2025-08-15 04:36:51
5
hoctruonglch
P học UED 😇 :
wow ido tik tok roi
2025-08-19 15:10:05
2
To see more videos from user @_muynee, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

ICH LIEBE MEIN LAND!!I love Germany 🇩🇪❤️❤️❤️ Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers such as Skewes's number and Moser's number, both of which are in turn much, much larger than a googolplex. As with these, it is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain an ordinary digital representation of Graham's number, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form  a b c ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ {\displaystyle a^{b^{c^{\cdot ^{\cdot ^{\cdot }}}}}}, even though Graham's number is indeed a power of three. However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387. Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is  g 64 {\displaystyle g_{64}},[1] where g n = { 3↑↑↑↑3,  if  n=1  and 3 ↑ g n − 1 3,  if  n≥2.  {\displaystyle g_{n}={\begin{cases}3\uparrow \uparrow \uparrow \uparrow 3,&{\text{if }}n=1{\text{ and}}\\3\uparrow ^{g_{n-1}}3,&{\text{if }}n\geq 2.\end{cases}}} Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be#germany🇩🇪 #based #creatorsearchinsights
ICH LIEBE MEIN LAND!!I love Germany 🇩🇪❤️❤️❤️ Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers such as Skewes's number and Moser's number, both of which are in turn much, much larger than a googolplex. As with these, it is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain an ordinary digital representation of Graham's number, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form a b c ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ {\displaystyle a^{b^{c^{\cdot ^{\cdot ^{\cdot }}}}}}, even though Graham's number is indeed a power of three. However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387. Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is g 64 {\displaystyle g_{64}},[1] where g n = { 3↑↑↑↑3, if n=1 and 3 ↑ g n − 1 3, if n≥2. {\displaystyle g_{n}={\begin{cases}3\uparrow \uparrow \uparrow \uparrow 3,&{\text{if }}n=1{\text{ and}}\\3\uparrow ^{g_{n-1}}3,&{\text{if }}n\geq 2.\end{cases}}} Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be#germany🇩🇪 #based #creatorsearchinsights

About