.
Region: SE
Wednesday 22 July 2026 12:39:53 GMT
193387
30500
90
7174
Music
Download
Comments
joshdp20 :
Do not give bro a racist role
2026-07-23 01:21:53
3337
Jason Villalva :
Beggars like it’s a slur 😭
2026-07-23 10:51:46
969
CrypticSkeletonKey :
*5 minutes later* GET THE SWORDS! GET THE SHIELDSSSSS!
2026-07-23 02:30:36
464
krish🏌🏾 :
Batman played him btw
2026-07-23 00:43:45
1011
thefilmcubano :
Bruce Wayne any time the cameras are off 😭
2026-07-23 17:56:44
0
Blackboygreg💫 :
Him 4 minutes later: “GET THE SPEARS!!”
2026-07-23 16:29:08
6
NeoDON :
Bro made it sound like a slur word 😭
2026-07-23 12:44:27
31
uptowndkay :
this was genuinely the best line in the whole movie🤣🤣🤣
2026-07-23 09:06:16
56
lattes_and_lenses :
He said that full heart
2026-07-22 23:52:15
103
Justin :
Fake as hell
2026-07-23 11:06:45
1
Manbabs1 :
He really wanted to improvise here 😂
2026-07-23 09:36:22
101
Namzino :
Why is Bruce Wayne trippin bro, we get you are Rich man
2026-07-23 14:42:22
5
gio :
Or when they want to go equal parts pay for the heist (they did no set ups)
2026-07-23 15:56:46
2
Jonte :
Me when someone ask me for a cigarette on a night out
2026-07-23 00:13:05
56
ZXS🍉999 :
one typo and its over for nro
2026-07-23 11:42:41
4
RAMIEL :
I'm glad I don't have friends
2026-07-23 15:23:52
1
Lull :
I haven't seen this movie but I love this meme 😂
2026-07-23 16:09:20
0
MASH :
I’m blaming Tarantino for this 😂
2026-07-23 16:06:11
0
To see more videos from user @scaroooo_0, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
![inspo: @ro Spain vs Argentina 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 valid. ##edit##fyp##tcc##football##spain](/video/cover/7664701749160070413.webp)
