Prática de Shadowing: Every Giant Number Explained - Aprenda a falar inglês com vídeo

Escolha um modo de prática

Cada modo abre uma sala de prática em tela cheia.

194 frases

Se as frases estiverem muito curtas ou longas, clique em Edit para ajustá-las.

If you wrote one digit on every atom in the observable universe,

you'd run out of atoms before you finished writing one of the numbers in this video.

And that number isn't even the biggest one here.

But let's start small.

A million, a billion, a trillion.

They sound like neighbours, but each one is a thousand times bigger than the last, and the easiest way to feel that is in seconds.

A million seconds is a little over 11 days.

A billion seconds is almost 32 years.

And a trillion seconds is about 32 ,000 years.

That's six times longer than humans have had writing.

32 ,000 years ago, the world was in an ice age and people were hunting mammoths.

So counting with words gets awkward fast.

A million is a one followed by six zeros.

Short version, ten to the sixth.

A billion is ten to the ninth.

A trillion, ten to the twelfth.

Every three zeros get a new word.

Quadrillion, quintillion, all the way up to a decillion, ten to the thirty -third.

The words run out soon.

The numbers don't. In 1920,

the American mathematician Edward Kasner asked his nine -year -old nephew what to call a one followed by a hundred zeros.

The boy, whose name was Milton, said, A Google.

A Google is ten to the hundredth.

It's easy to write down.

It's one line.

But what can you count with it?

Atoms In the entire observable universe, in all the stars, planets and gas clouds, there are about 10 to the 80th.

That's less than a Google.

Not a little less, a hundred quintillion times less.

Imagine every atom in the universe turned out to be a whole universe full of atoms.

Now you'd have more than a Google.

But in our real universe, there just aren't that many things.

There are that many possibilities, though.

In 1950, Claude Shannon estimated how many different chess games there could be.

He got about 10 to the 120th, more than a Google.

Combinations grow much faster than stuff.

By the way, one company's name is a misspelling of Google, and its servers still live at the domain 1E100,

which is how programmers write a Google.

Milton came up with the next word too.

A Googleplex, he said, is a one followed by writing zeros until you get tired.

Casno pointed out that different people get tired at different times, so he made it precise.

A Googleplex is a one followed by a Google zeros, ten to the power of a Google.

And this is where the paper runs out.

To write a Googleplex, you need to write a Google zeros.

Even if you put one zero on every atom in the universe, you wouldn't have enough atoms there are only 10 to the 80th of them,

and you need 10 to the 100th zeros.

If you printed a million zeros per book, you'd need 10 to the 94th books.

That's more books than there are atoms in the universe.

Carl Sagan made this point in Cosmos back in 1980.

There isn't room for a Googleplex in the known universe.

But numbers like this do show up in physics.

If the universe is infinite, then somewhere out there is an exact copy of Earth, and an exact copy of you watching this video.

The physicist Max Tegmark estimated how far away, roughly 10 to the 10 to the 28th miles.

And at that size, it doesn't matter whether you say miles, feet or inches, the difference gets lost somewhere in the last digits of the exponent.

And a Googleplex is bigger still, much bigger.

The Googleplex was invented as a joke, but once an even bigger number was needed for real.

Prime numbers divide only by themselves and 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11.

The further you go, the rarer they get.

Gauss came up with a formula that roughly tells you how many primes there are below any number.

People checked it for billions, for trillions, for numbers with 19 zeros.

And every time, the formula came out a little too high.

Every single time.

You'd think it would always be that way.

But in 1914, John Littlewood proved it isn't.

Somewhere far out, the formula starts missing in the other direction, and it flips back and forth infinitely many times.

Where exactly, he didn't say.

In 1933, his student Stanley Skews found a limit.

The first flip has to happen before 10 to the 10 to the 10 to the 34th.

Three stories of exponents.

G. H.

Hardy called it the largest number that had ever served any definite purpose in mathematics.

Today we know the first flip happens much earlier, somewhere around 10 to the 316th.

But the exact spot still hasn't been found.

And that's the lesson.

A pattern can hold for every number we can reach and still be false.

To go further, we need a new way of writing.

and it's built like a ladder.

Adding three to itself three times is multiplication.

Multiplying three by itself three times is a power, and if you raise three to a power and then raise three to that result,

you get a tower of powers.

In 1976, Donald Newth suggested arrows for this.

One arrow is an ordinary power.

Three arrow three is 27.

Two arrows make a tower.

3 double arrow 3 is 3 to the 3 to the 3.

That's 3 to the 27th.

7 ,625 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 and change.

Not scary yet, but add one more story to the tower.

3 to the power of that number.

The result has more than 3 .5 trillion digits.

Now 3 arrows.

3 triple arrow.

3 is a tower of 3's more than 7 .5 trillion stories tall.

Not that many digits.

that many stories.

For comparison, a Googleplex fits in a tower of just four tens and skews his number in a tower of five.

Four stories of tens and the number already has more digits than there are atoms in the universe.

Each new arrow repeats the previous one as many times as the last step produced,

and these are the arrows you need to describe the next number.

100

Take a cube and connect every corner to every other corner.

101

Colour each line red or blue.

102

Now look for four corners that lie in one plane with all six lines between them the same colour.

103

With an ordinary cube, you can colour the lines so that no such four exist.

104

But what about a cube in more dimensions?

105

From which dimension on is there always such a group of four, no matter how you colour?

106

In 1971, Ronald Graham and Bruce Rothschild proved that such a dimension exists.

107

And in 1977, Martin Gardner wrote about a number

108

Graham had found as an upper bound for the answer.

109

Three years later, it was in the Guinness Book of World Records as the largest number ever used in a serious proof.

110

Here's how it's built.

111

Take three, four arrows, three.

112

That's step one, and it's already monstrously bigger than anything so far.

113

In step two, there are as many arrows between the threes as step one produced.

114

In step 3, as many as step 2.

115

And so on, 64 times.

116

Physicists say a region the size of your head can hold only a limited amount of information.

117

Cram in more, and that region becomes a black hole.

118

The digits of Graham's number won't fit in your head.

119

They won't fit in the whole universe.

120

And yet we know how it ends.

121

Its last digits are 2464195387.

122

And the actual answer to the problem?

123

Today we know it's at least 13.

124

The answer might be a small number.

125

Only the bound was enormous.

126

Graham's number came from a problem.

127

The next one comes from a game you can play on a sheet of paper.

128

You draw trees.

129

Dots connected by lines, with no loops.

130

Each dot can be one of several colours.

131

The first tree can have at most one dot.

132

The second, at most two.

133

The third, at most three.

134

And so on.

135

The main rule?

136

No earlier tree may fit inside a later one with the same colours and the same branching.

137

As soon as you can't draw a new tree, the game is over.

138

In 1960, Joseph Kruskal proved a theorem that means this game always ends, no matter how many colours you use.

139

With one colour, the game lasts one move.

140

With two colours, three moves.

141

And for three colours, the logician Harvey Friedman called the length of the longest possible game tree of three.

142

It's finite.

143

The game really does end.

144

But next to tree of three, Graham's number is practically zero.

145

Friedman showed that if you try to prove this game ends using modest arithmetic,

146

the proof itself would be longer than anything you could write down in the universe.

147

Three colours and simple rules.

148

And the result is a number that makes all of Knuth's arrows look like toys.

149

Every number so far can be computed.

150

Slowly, longer than the life of the universe, but by the rules.

151

And then there are numbers that can't be computed at all.

152

Take the simplest computer, a Turing machine.

153

It's an endless tape of cells and a head that reads a symbol, writes a new one, and moves, following a table of rules.

154

Back in 1936, Turing proved that there's no way to tell in advance, for every program, whether it will ever stop or run forever.

155

In 1962, Tibor Rado came up with a game called The Busy Beaver.

156

Take all machines with a given number of rules and run them on a blank tape.

157

Among the ones that stop, find the one that runs the longest.

158

With one rule, one step.

159

With two, six.

160

With three, twenty -one one, with four a hundred

161

and seven with five forty seven million one hundred seventy six thousand eight hundred seventy steps

162

that was only proven in july 2024

163

and it was done mostly by amateurs working together online with six rules in 2025 someone found a machine

164

that runs longer than two triple arrow five this function grows faster than any function

165

that can be computed sooner or later it overtakes the arrows, graham and tree.

166

And for a machine with 215 rules, the answer can no longer be proven with ordinary mathematics.

167

That was shown in October 2026.

168

There's one last step.

169

In 2007, at MIT, two philosophers held a duel.

170

Who can name the bigger number?

171

Agustin Rayo won like this.

172

Take every number that can be described in the language of logic with no more than a Google symbols.

173

Rayo's number is the smallest number bigger than all of them.

174

A million seconds, the atoms in the universe, a Google, a Googleplex, Skews,

175

the Arrows, Graham, Tree of Three, the Beaver, Rayo.

176

It feels like we've gone very far.

177

But here's the strange part.

178

Whichever of these numbers you pick, there are infinitely many numbers bigger than it, and only finitely many smaller.

179

So almost all whole numbers are bigger than Rayo's number.

180

We haven't gone far at all.

181

We're standing at the very start of the number line.

182

So is the biggest number infinity?

183

No. Infinity isn't the last number in line.

184

It answers a different question.

185

Not which number, but how many numbers there are in total.

186

And that question has a ladder too.

187

Georg Cantor showed that infinities come in different sizes.

188

There are infinitely many whole numbers, but there are even more points on a line.

189

And above that infinity, there's another one, and so on, forever.

190

And any number in this video, even Rayo's number, is no better than one when you put it next to infinity.

191

Enormous, but finite.

192

We started with the idea that the universe doesn't have enough atoms to write down one number.

193

Now it's clear the problem isn't the universe.

194

Numbers simply grow faster than any place you could write them down.

Baixar aplicativo

Tudo o que você precisa para falar fluentemente

Pronúncia com IANota em cada frase

Prática de IPADomine cada som

VocabulárioMonte seu banco de palavras

Jogo de vocabulárioAprenda brincando

Escaneie o QR

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

FOR YOU

Vídeo recomendado

104 frases

Vocabulário e dicas de fala para esta lição

Esta aula de conversação usa o vídeo “Every Giant Number Explained”. As palavras que mais se repetem: universe, arrow, Google, atom, colour. Este vídeo tem 194 frases e 1954 palavras para praticar shadowing. A fala dura 12:13. O falante fala em ritmo natural, cerca de 160 palavras por minuto, próximo de uma conversa do dia a dia. Apenas 81% das palavras estão entre as 3.000 mais comuns do inglês, por isso o vocabulário é exigente.

Vocabulário principal deste vídeo

15 palavras do vídeo que vale a pena aprender, com pronúncia e significado:

Palavra	Pronúncia	Significado
arrow substantivo	/ˈæɹəʊ/	flecha, seta
atom substantivo	/ˈætəm/	átomo
digit substantivo	/ˈdɪd͡ʒɪt/	dígito, algarismo
infinity substantivo	/ɪnˈfɪnɪti/	infinito, infinidade
formula substantivo	/ˈfɔː.mjʊ.lə/	fórmula
ordinary adjetivo	/ˈɔɹdɪnɛɹi/	ordinário, normal
flip verbo	/flɪp/	virar
dimension substantivo	/daɪˈmɛn.ʃən/	dimensão
cube substantivo	/kjub/	cubo
infinitely advérbio	/ˈɪnfɪnɪtli/	infinitamente
connect verbo	/kəˈnɛkt/	conectar
roughly advérbio	/ˈɹʌf.li/	rudemente, precariamente
symbol substantivo	/ˈsɪmbəl/	símbolo
triple adjetivo	/ˈtɹɪp.əl/	triplo
estimate substantivo	/ˈɛs.tɪ.mət/	estimativa, cálculo

Phrasal verbs que você vai ouvir

Palavra	Pronúncia	Significado
come up with verbo		pensar (em), alcançar
run out verbo		ficar sem
write down verbo		anotar
come out verbo	/ˌkʌm ˈaʊt/	sair, partir
point out verbo		apontar

Frases que vale a pena repetir

Frases curtas e completas do vídeo que você pode usar na conversa do dia a dia:

You'd think it would always be that way.
It feels like we've gone very far.
We haven't gone far at all.

Gramática neste vídeo

As estruturas que o falante mais usa, com as palavras exatas do vídeo:

Estrutura	No vídeo
Voz passiva be + particípio passado — o foco está no que acontece, não em quem faz	was invented · been found · can be computed
Present perfect have/has + particípio passado — uma ação passada que ainda importa agora	have had · hasn't been found · we've gone

Pronúncia para ficar de olho

O falante usa 23 contrações e formas reduzidas, como isn't, you'd, can't. Diga-as na forma curta, do jeito que você ouve.

Os sons de “th”: mathematics /mæθ(.ə)ˈmæt.ɪks/, sixth /sɪksθ/, thirty /ˈθɝti/, ninth /naɪnθ/, theorem /ˈθiərəm/
Os sons de “sh” e “zh”: dimension /daɪˈmɛn.ʃən/, sheet /ʃit/, combinations /kɑmbɪˈneɪʃənz/, logician /ləˈd͡ʒɪʃən/, mathematician /ˌmæθ.(ə.)məˈtɪʃ.ən/
Palavras longas — acerte a sílaba tônica: infinity /ɪnˈfɪnɪti/, ordinary /ˈɔɹdɪnɛɹi/, infinitely /ˈɪnfɪnɪtli/, mathematics /mæθ(.ə)ˈmæt.ɪks/, practically /ˈpɹæk.tɪ.k(ə.)li/

Sons difíceis para falantes de português:

Consoante final — sem acrescentar um “i” depois: digit /ˈdɪd͡ʒɪt/, flip /flɪp/, cube /kjub/, tape /teɪ̯p/, connect /kəˈnɛkt/
/l/ final — a língua toca o céu da boca, não vira “u”: symbol /ˈsɪmbəl/, triple /ˈtɹɪp.əl/, duel /ˈdul/, observable /əbˈzɜː.və.bəl/
/h/ — um sopro suave, diferente do “r”: hardy /ˈhɑɹdi/, hundredth /ˈhʌndɹə(d)θ/

Como praticar com este vídeo

Ouça o vídeo inteiro uma vez sem falar e anote as palavras que você não conhece.
Comece na velocidade 0,75×, faça shadowing frase por frase e volte à velocidade normal quando ficar fácil.
Grave a sua voz e compare com o original, prestando atenção a palavras como arrow, atom, digit.

O que é a Técnica de Shadowing?

Shadowing é uma técnica de aprendizado de idiomas com base científica, originalmente desenvolvida para o treinamento de intérpretes profissionais. O método é simples, mas poderoso: você ouve áudio em inglês nativo e repete imediatamente em voz alta — como uma sombra seguindo o falante com 1-2 segundos de atraso. Pesquisas mostram melhora significativa na precisão da pronúncia, entonação, ritmo, sons conectados, compreensão auditiva e fluência na fala.

Técnica de shadowing: leia o guia completo passo a passo →

Prática de Shadowing: Every Giant Number Explained - Aprenda a falar inglês com vídeo

Escolha um modo de prática

Baixar aplicativo

How real are the real numbers, really?

Gemini 4 Argon explained in 5min..

Brainf**k in 100 Seconds

What If You Lit a Match on Jupiter, Would The Planet Explode?

How do microSD Cards Store 2 TB in such a TINY space?

[Practice Problems] Regular Expressions (Regex) - Visually Explained

$15 Trillion Money-Making Machine | How BlackRock Became Too Powerful to Ignore

Mathematician Collapses All Functions to One Weird Formula

Every Processing Unit Explained in 20 Minutes

Give me 31 minutes, I will make PyTorch click forever

GENERAL CHEMISTRY explained in 19 Minutes

Go’s Big Mistake