@andersontorrees: Eles já estão dominando o @Hopi Hari na #horadohorror 2026 #N3KRON

Anderson Torres
Anderson Torres
Open In TikTok:
Region: BR
Friday 14 August 2026 00:16:19 GMT
393837
37067
423
14341

Music

Download

Comments

idkwhtsayy
idkwhtsay :
medo d ter um louco de vdd infiltrado 😭
2026-08-14 01:10:28
2228
brinho_1
אלמיידה :
Pode bater nesses bicho?
2026-08-14 01:14:50
198
mafezikah
mafezikah :
Nossa achei a maquiagens desse ano fraca
2026-08-14 02:26:50
640
vinisantarelli
Viní Santarelli :
Cadê o Divo
2026-08-14 01:57:52
368
igorhenrique__
ℑ𝔤𝔬𝔯 :
Tá difícil ein… 25 anos e entregar isso? Esses personagens de resistência bem micosos 🫠🫠🫠
2026-08-14 09:33:09
104
laisalvees31
Laís Alves :
Galerinha já deu de Donatello, bora evoluir né!!! 😉
2026-08-14 02:27:06
32
aliciiabs
alicia :
eu vou ter q correr de chat gpt?
2026-08-14 18:47:14
38
matheus.ff316
Matheus :
cadê a parte assustadora da fantasia, tá mais para um grupo indo para um show de rock
2026-08-14 09:37:35
8
mbaganhaa
manu baganha :
quis monstrinhos mais sem sal (corta pra eu morrendo de medo qnd for 😛
2026-08-14 06:07:35
24
luciannasantos04
Luluzinha🏳️‍🌈 :
O medo de ter realmente um sem noção 😁e sair matando todo mundo 😁
2026-08-14 20:12:26
6
modelsexcrets
Claraalvez82828 :
Eles poderiam lançar um ano que só teria palhaço
2026-08-14 09:02:38
33
viajecomangel
viajecomangel :
Aintigamemte era o parque inteiro depois foi a metade… Ano passado tinha uns 10 monstros no parque inteiro… nem vou mais!!
2026-08-14 02:19:41
51
wassupdg95
᪲ :
vai tá eu e os monstros gritando resistência
2026-08-14 01:09:33
12
daniloribeiro46789
Danilo Ribeiro6631 :
Donatello Estará Nessa Edição
2026-08-14 00:44:48
11
gomes.giuu
𝒢𝒾𝓊𝓁𝒾𝒶 :
Não tô querendo julgar nem nada até porque eu AMO hdh, mass tá meio fraquinho né?
2026-08-14 07:52:31
9
agathalorenalima123
🌀⋆hׁׅׅ֮꯱.ɑׁׅtׁׅ⋆ :
ano passado tava mais legal
2026-08-14 02:24:01
8
thcrayy
RAYANE :
nunca será o Playcenter
2026-08-14 14:45:01
8
To see more videos from user @andersontorrees, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

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 ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ {\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.[1] Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is  g 64 {\displaystyle g_{64}},[2] 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 #edit #fyp #fyppppppppppppppppppppppp #viral #makemefamous
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 ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ {\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.[1] Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is g 64 {\displaystyle g_{64}},[2] 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 #edit #fyp #fyppppppppppppppppppppppp #viral #makemefamous

About