วีดีโอ

so one is two and one and one and one and one and one

so one is two times one,two times one half and one half twotimes one half and 2 times 1 divided by .5 and two times 1/.5

giving the leter i another meaning to different different from the square root of minus one

we can solve this problem by saying 4 divided by 2 is 2i

if you divde one orange into two person you still have one orange one half and one half ,one half,one divided by .5 and one/.5

not possible is for zero and equal to zero

not possble is for zero and equal to zero

Nice!

So the play is always you pick a door and a goat is revealed. I have heard some suggest that if the host doesn't know but the door with the goat is opened randomly the odds change to 50/50 but that sounds like nonsense to me. Any thoughts? I don't see how this formula changes depending on what the host knows as long as a goat is revealed ABC=3 Pick, A=1 ... BC=2 Goat reveal, B=0 ... C=2

ABC=3 Pick, A=1 ... BC=2 Goat reveal, B=0 ... C=2

I think the 1st one is the best. Its all coming back to simple definition. I just recently discover volterra's product integral (1st kind) in which could be see as another way to create e.

Zero is indivisible.

e

As an engineer I know based on the fundamental theorem of engineering that e = pi = 3.

I was doing this in pre-school so why are you saying 5th level math? What a maroon you are.

this video made me follow you!

Makes the same amount of sense as men competing in women's sports.

In the real world, a lot of things that exists in mathematics does't make any sense at all.

0! doesn't make any sense. It's like dividing by zero in my opinion. Ou the same as infinity minus infinity.

E is actually also a meme

my favourite definition is first defining exp : C -> C and defining e as exp(1)

Wonderful, Dr Sean. A new subscriber here.

interesting.... at the introduction, I thought it was going to be a version of encountering two spirits beside two doors. You're at a standstill unless you go through one of the doors. The doors are identical and the spirits are identical. A voice informs you that one of the doors is the door to living happily ever after and one is the door to a lifetime of torment and that one of the spirits always tells the truth and one always tells the lie. You are allotted the opportunity to ask one question only of either of the spirits, What question will you ask? (took me 3 days when I was in 9th grade and even then I took a hint). You wouldn't believe the number of people who argue and get mad at me because they think I'm wrong,

I just see it as the identity of multiplication.

Coin flips have a 50-50 chance of being called regardless of how many times you flip the coin. There will always be a 50-50 chance, therefore the 1/4 observation would not be correct.

If all my friends were good to understand english and wanted an advice of someone to teach them very good, I would recommend your channel, you're explanations are very understandable and well conected

(1/0)=x or 1=x0 or 1=x(1-1) = x-x=1 or x=x+1 on power 2 we have x^2=(x+1)^2= x^2+2x+1=x^2 or 2x+1=0 x =-1/2 but in case 1=x(10-10) or x(100-100) or x(inf-inf) we get solution like x=-1/inf or sqrt(1/0)=sqrt(-1/inf)= 0i So the answer is ----- imaginary zero----

Level 6: Stratonovich Integrals

since 1 door is taken away which you didn't pick and must have a goat behind means that you couldn't possibly have chosen that door to begin with. you could only pick a car or one of the goat that the host didn't take away. so to say you have 1/3 chance of picking the winning door is flawed.

how did you become a doctor??

she was wrong. once 1 of the goat is taken away, you didn't really have 1/3 chance to pick the car. there's never 3 doors to pick from. it's as if you couldn't pick that door with goat the host reveals. therefore you always have 50/50 to pick car.

In middleschool basics 1/10^n in every number base has a limit as n goes to infinity, of 0. But does it equal 0. It is not a converging limit in that it is a one sided limit. It is more intuitive to believe that a converging limit is equal in value to the entity it refers to. Does that limit exist, does it refer to a continuum of numbers less than 1 that ".99..." represents.

(01:43) is the moment where y'all fucked Terrence Howard up for life.

If i have a number system with only the number 0 and no other, i can define 0/0 in a well defined way. 0*0=0 0/0=0 0+0=0 0-0=0. A model is a clock with only a number 0. It does not make much sense, but you can define 0/0 here. In the standing clock arithmetic.

It should also work in surreal numbers. Hyperreals are a subset of surreals.

Dividing by zero has resulted in some good memes though. :D

A negative number is an unfinished mathematical operation sitting next to a number. Now I'll watch the dogma video.

in italy we do lebesgue integration at bachelor degree💀

Thank you for these explanations. I really enjoyed the video, it was so easy to understand. Thanks.

Very simple - 3 people // you see 2 blue hats: you got the red one // you see 2 red hats: you got the blue one// you see 2 diferent colors NOW IT IS TIME TO GUESS BECAUSE YOU GOT OR RED OR BLUE = 50/50

If you multiply 0.999... by 10^n, where n is the number of decimal places( number of 9s), the result is 'wait for it' 1/e.

Great video! My only question really is, what formula are you using for area of a triangle in Level 5? I understand why the sides are x(1-z) and y(1-z) and why you integrate, but why is the area xy(1-z)^2, the product of the two sides? Wouldn’t that be the area of a rectangle with those dimensions?

I enjoyed this video very much. The fact that one can find e in Pascal's triangle really blew my mind. There are so much hidden gems in this mathematical object, I feel like I discover more of them every time, from unexpected grounds. Thank you!

1 is the multiplicative identity. No matter how many times you multiply a number by 1 you do not change that number. No matter how many times you multiply 1 times 1, it will equal 1 or 1 raised to any power is 1. One way to deal with infinite digit numbers is to see if a number of finite steps leads to a LIMIT. We know that in base 2, the limit of the partial sums of the series represented by ".11..." is 1. The actual limit it is based on is Lim n->°°, 1/10^n=0. This is, of course, all in base 2, then ".11..."^°° should be 1, again in base 2. Let's take finite steps. .11×.11=.1001 .11111×.11111=.1111000001 .1111111111×.1111111111= .11111111100000000001 This does not look like I am approaching 1 in base 2. Well maybe if I ignore the 0,s??? Do that with ".99..." in decimal digits! Not only do you have to ignore over half the digits of 0, the final 1, and a 8 in the middle. Can ".99..." represent the number 1, of course, as anything can. ".99..." is the closest representation less than 1 in decimal digits. The problem is infinity. It is incomplete,inconsistent and imprecise.

The Monty Hall problem may seem complex, but it's actually quite straightforward. With three doors, your initial chances of winning are 33.3%. When one door is removed, you’re left with only two doors, which gives you a straightforward 50/50 choice. Regardless of differing opinions, the math remains the same. The only real uncertainty comes from the fact that, if this were a television show, the outcome might be manipulated for entertainment purposes.

The root of the problem is that the math assumes 0 x 0 = 0 which is obvious nonsense. 0 x 0 is literally no zero or anything but zero. Let's say 0 x 0 = 10. For example, apples. Then 10/0 is a question of how many non-apples, like pears, are in 10 apples. Obviously zero. It works.

".99..." could be considered equal to 1 (Why?) In the same way that the length of a line could be considered 1 when we can never measure its length exactly.

You should have had an explanation for 3 year olds for me. I’m actually smart and don’t get it. Let me ask this at least, please answer if you see this. My mind puts it this way. If you have 6 cookies and divide them amongst 0 friends why is the answer not 6? You have 6 of them and distributed them to no one. You have 6. At least tell me that is not that crazy to think. Thank you.😼

e^0 = ? you prove 0! using the same unproved statement e^0, if e^0 = 1 and 0! = 1 is just manipulation this is not proof.

Dr Sean you’re the best.