วีดีโอ

@ 0:39 The analogues of the trigonometric rules in non Euclidean geometry are approximately the same as the ones in Euclidean geometry if the sides are very small

great video but please change the batteries in your smoke alarm

The Riemann hypothesis sounds real easy, no way they didn't solve it yet

BREATHE

slight mistake, eulers polyhedra formula only states true if the body has no holes aka isnt a torus in topology

bro give 1000000 hrs stuydy in 10 min

What if I want the Goat?

wait a minute. if the Hilbert Hotel has an infinite number of rooms, they don't even need to move people out of their current rooms to accommodate new guests. they'll always room. how is this a paradox? this is just common sense.

Zeno must of been high AF to come up with that Paradox. either that or he clearly doesn't understand basic physics.

You didn't include the two envelopes paradox, 0/10.

Nah most of is ODE , when working in classical mechanism, i found that. I cant solve Lagrange equation without know how to solve ODE , so i found the paper in library for a month ,then collect pieces of information in many major from economy, fluid mechanic , social science , chemistry, electrical engineer, industry design, architecture , computer science . i found that all that product/model that the majors are currently using is ODE form or a expression of eignvalue of ODE .😅 i take a advantage that school only teach how to calculate, so if i know ODE form i can solve all topic of relevant major, and it true . in accounting and law they mostly using algebra and tree thoery, mixed human factor . then i reveal the world " godfather" according relevant topic both legal and illegal, then it lead me to a rich rss as know as social science. right now. I m development tool to efficiency the knowledge flow , it will be released in further. Moreover , the value which is the partial value of ODE sometime called as "MARCO" , fine, complex, formula ... It have many form, and suffix "ian" ,which mean perform smt ,make the world " mathematician " really have own. meaning. Thanks to visit my TED talk

Here is a an equation sub+1=me

Would really prefer a human narrator, would love for you to collaborate with someone. It’s a good enough AI voice to be in the uncanny valley

The real Kissing problem: mathematicians need to work on their pickup game

When first exposed to logarithms people often get hung up on which base is being used (and it is important in some situations - the natural log in calculus for example), but the properties of logarithms used to simplify arithmetic work in every base. That is what makes them so fundamentally useful.

How far is "far enough away" in the lonely runner conjecture?

P=NP but the CIA made me do suicide by 38 rounds of 50 cal rounds in the back of my head

KNOT THEORY MENTIONED ‼️‼️‼️

how to beat collatz: set n to be a decimal

Pitiful mathematicians, wanting proof for an entire realm of numbers instead of accepting trillions of valid results 😂

Fermat's theorem is proved by Wiles

I have never once heard the Riemann Hypothesis explained in a way that makes it "sound easy," as claimed in the video title. After watching this video, that still holds 🤨

1-1=0 was important too

guys pi + e = 5.8598 its not that hard guys!1!1!1

I dont understand why the title ends with "solved". ( I wont watch nor vote because I was clickbaited )

The thing is primes are extremely random.

wasnt fermats last theorem abt every integer bigger than, not only 3?

From the beginning of video to schrodinger i was like oh i know that but after schrodinger it was like oh its whole new level shit i dont even know about one thing in that equations even though video gives me the information about the terms.Still far away from understanding universe.

Nobody's gonna talk about how crazy the fact that Evariste Galois literally created new maths in order to make his proofs is? 🚬

Abel was the first to prove you can't solve an equation of the 5th degree or higher. However, Galois generalized it further by proving the necessary and sufficient conditions on when a polynomial equation is soluble by radicals.

Isn't bertrands paradox kind of obvious??? I figured it was 1/3 just by looking at it for a few seconds, or is it the case of right answer but the wrong way to solve it? Because say your line begins with a point directly on B. 2/3rds of the time, it will connect with another point on the circle between B and A, or between B and C. In this case, because the line does not stretch further than going from point B to A, or point B to C, it is not longer than one of the sides. 1/3 of the time, it will connect to a point between A and C. In this case, the line will stretch longer than from point B to A, or B to C. From there, can't we assume it'll work with every point around the circle, not just the starting point B

mathematicians will do anything but ask the damn kid if they’re lonely or not!!

1:19 What, no love for the natural log, base _e??_

7:16 slight mistake, the divergence of the E-field is not 0. Other than that amazing video 😁

1:45 first name pronounced wrong, last name pronounced correct. Usually it is the other way around. Great video on these problems nonetheless man

Funnily enough the Maxwell Eq's as shown describe none of the effects advertised, bc you only showed the source-free version that can only describe light in an empty space.

Important fact, special relativity doesn't say that the laws of physics are the same for everyone, just for inertial observers. GR says that the laws of physics are the same for everyone. Also E=mc² by far isn't the key equation in relativity. I'd write down the Einstein field equations G=8πT, or the metric dS² (as a function of x,y,z,ct) or both. From these you would be able to deduce everything whike E=mc² isn't even coordinate independent

Uhm, the standard model laplacian?

The goldbach conjecture reminds me a lot of the fundamental theorem of arithmetic

New subscriber

The classification of Finite Simple Groups was not completed in the 90s. There have been several stages where the classification was deemed complete, but it was only with Aschbacher and Smith's monumental work on the classification of quasithin groups, that the final piece was in place in 2004. I don't think any further gaps have come to light since then.

The Einstein Field equations should really be shown for relativity instead of E = mc^2. The simplified reduction to rest mass energy is much less important than the other aspects of relativity.

Bell's Inequality, Euler's Identity

This shit is gonna blow up.. I can feel it in my black testicles

Kewl

The description of the Maxwell's equations apply for a vacuum. Charge and current densities are missing here, and thus do not correlate with what you tried to explain afterwards.

What is V + F - E = 2 useful for?

Cool

How You make these videos? PowerPoint?

I have a feeling like some of the paradoxes needs a time variable or some sort of consideration of periods of time (cycles?) for which the paradoxes can exist. IDK, too late.