@onlyy_pt: J’espère le mariage 💍🙌🏾#relatablevideos #couple #fyp #republication

T & P
T & P
Open In TikTok:
Region: FR
Wednesday 24 June 2026 02:43:34 GMT
294607
61422
125
13477

Music

Download

Comments

maackalii
MALICKA :
bonsoir dites lui de me débloquer
2026-06-24 11:41:55
1325
taiss_422
taiss_422💎 :
j’espere que vous vous marierez 🙏🙏
2026-06-24 09:39:56
288
catyakch
K~ :
Tellement booster que vous vous ressemblez comme des frères 😭😔
2026-06-24 03:05:54
429
manou.eliana23
manou.eliana23 :
Je cherche le commentaire de mon gar mais je ne vois pas 😭💔
2026-06-24 20:15:14
48
cbeau32
c'est beau... :
Joli scénario, mais on connaît tous la fin du film : ça commence par des paillettes et ça finit dans le noir complet
2026-06-24 15:53:03
89
myriamchery7
M 😶‍🌫️ :
Les âmes sœurs se ressemblent.
2026-06-24 14:03:09
57
kokimii2
ҜФҜIMII :
ne vous laisser pas ohh, aller jusqu’aux mariages 🙏❤️
2026-06-24 22:59:33
12
talarefff
Toshh :
Je peux être photographe ou pas
2026-06-24 12:21:21
12
gracedakouri652
Grâce 💦❤️ :
que le soleil sèche votre amour 🚶🙂‍↔️😌
2026-06-24 18:21:57
10
smh94170
Smh🤓 :
Ça seras le mariage 🫶🏽🙏🏾.
2026-06-24 17:55:40
11
mael.dion
Maël🇨🇮❤️💙 :
Longue vie à votre couple 🤞❤️
2026-06-24 16:31:00
7
tiktok.comstoique17
STOÏQUE :
Ça commence par Romeo et Juliette puis ça finit par du Jackie et Michel 💔
2026-06-24 20:14:13
4
majolie0001
majolie0001 :
Le pire goumin ekie j’accepte mon cœur reste fermer
2026-06-24 14:28:39
5
rnlamelo
Rn :
@@Noura🥢♣️♠️🇨🇮🇲🇱
2026-06-25 00:25:09
1
solgrace_makiese
soso_girl 🐓❤️🇨🇩💦✨ :
La musique prouve que ça aura une fin agréable aux yeux du créateur 🙂
2026-06-24 20:35:41
3
To see more videos from user @onlyy_pt, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Wonderful island 🏝️ || 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 introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, 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^{\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 \bm{g_{64}} where \bm{g_n} { 3 \bm{\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow} 3 if n 1 and 3 \bm{\uparrow^{g_{n-1}}} 3 if n \bm{\geq} 2. \bm{{\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 valid.#andres #utoya #actor #rampage #treanding
Wonderful island 🏝️ || 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 introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, 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^{\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 \bm{g_{64}} where \bm{g_n} { 3 \bm{\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow} 3 if n 1 and 3 \bm{\uparrow^{g_{n-1}}} 3 if n \bm{\geq} 2. \bm{{\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 valid.#andres #utoya #actor #rampage #treanding

About