The live stream was on my second channel and it happened without warning. th-cam.com/users/mattparker2 Well, I gave advanced notice to people who support me on Patreon. Join in and get a heads-up about other similar stuff: patreon.com/standupmaths
Patreon is well worth it. For anyone reading this not part of his Patreon -- join now (by Aug 7th, 2021), and get a free toroidal balloon mailed to you. I mean, if that doesn't entice you, I don't know what will.
After watching this livestream, I suggested that when live, in person shows are possible again, you do a true Berglass effect trick live. The odds of it working are 1/52. And given the nature of your show, having a trick that fails 51/52 times in order to get the best ever video of someone performing the holy grail of mathematics is just up your ally.
My magic peaked when I shuffled a deck of cards and my dad picked one and I said what it was, complete guess, he asked how I did it and I let him shuffle the deck and pick a card and I guessed it correct again, I was expecting to be wrong the second time and say that's how I did it - I guessed. Absolutely flawless performance I can't do again.
I have a theory since I have been thinking about this for a very long time, where there are a few tricks to bump up that 1/52 chances. To start, you can actually move the cards up or down by not specifying in the beginning that the number to be "the card at that number" or" after dealing x amount of cards out of the deck, the top card is the specified card". Then there is the dealing from top or just flipping the deck. Also the advertising card and jokers could in theory be taken out as instructed. Since most magician never specified what exactly the audience should expect the effect to be, there are still rooms for magician to play with.
I love the look of relief when you got the right card, Also isn't funny how magicians have used the whole fact it was a brand new deck that was still sealed to show they didn't stack the deck but in reality they can only do it with a new deck.
I mean, you could always rearrange the cards to new deck order, just would be a lot of work and it would look suspicious if you claimed it was a randomly shuffled deck, so ya, you either need to not show the cards or annouch they are in new deck order.
Or have a memorized or stacked deck, even there is some stacks that you can make from shuffling the brand new order and dont seem stacked because of the lack of paterns
There are decks that come pre stacked, not in the order that you think. To a layman, it looks like a normal shuffled deck. ACAAN can be performed even without the new deck order.
This trick is somehow even more impressive after knowing how it's done. Not only do you have to do all that math in your head while keeping up convincing patter, but then you have to do a difficult sleight of hand maneuver perfectly 6 consecutive times.
I dunno whether you'll find this or not, but I really want to give a big thanks to you Mr.Parker. You are among one of the many guys who has made me drawn more into this wonderful and surreal world of mathematics. THANKS A LOT! 😊🙂
😂 I didn't see any stream, but I have a feeling it's the classic Matt Parker "guys I want you to go crazy in the chat when I hold up this rope and say my stupid line" 😁
Just HOW LUCKY is it that In and Out shuffles begin with I and O and map easily (visually) to 1 and 0... imagine it had been the other way around, that would be incredibly confusing!
If it was the other way around, I’d just swap definitions of “In” and “Out” and it would work again. Currently, we’re tracking the positions of the outside cards. If they stay first and last, it’s called an “out” and v.v. But if you track the positions of the INSIDE cards instead, then you can call it an “out” if an INSIDE card moves OUT to the first and last positions. Done. 1 is still In and 0 is still Out. Fixed.
@@estherpettigrew3042 the definitions of 'in' and 'out' faro shuffling are in mathematical literature, so it's nontrivial to swap them 'just for this video'. But Matt could have named them something else that would still make the same visual coincidence/pun. Maybe 'lift' and 'quirk' because 'L' and 'Q' vaguely resemble binary digits, Matt'd think of something better than that.
Morgan Harris mentioned in their comment that the plus sign in the intro card @ 1:20 kind of looks like the XOR symbol (i.e. "standup ⊕ mathematician") What an easter egg! (Parker's XOR?)
As a magician, I can certainly say that your Faro Shuffle is better than most non-magicians! (When you were first learning it, I'm betting it took you a long time before you could perform the technique consistently, right? I know it definitely did for me!)
I loved the moment it went from seriously seriously tricky to something that was just locked in though. Table faro next time I’m stuck with a deck and a pile of time.
I think Matt qualifies as being a magician. I don't know if he's done any tricks at Festival of the Spoken Nerd, so he might be an amateur magician. He's definitely done math-based tricks on this channel before.
😂 I didn't see any stream, but I have a feeling it's the classic Matt Parker... "guys I want you to go crazy in the chat when I hold up this rope and say my stupid line"
Matt, you inspired me to do a boat load of work on ellipse circumferences over quarantine. Ive beat Ramanujan a couple times and i have some new ellipse integrals.
Being a hobbyist magician I was well familiar with the Elsmey count. Being a computer scientist by trade, I've only just discovered today that Alex Elmsley was also a mathematician who published a lot of mathematics papers. Mind: blown.
Magicians have been known to practice a trick like this for hours a day every day for years before they’re confident enough to do it in front of an audience.
I do a little bit of card Magic and I just gotta give you props for having a pharao shuffle good enough for you not to be nervous doing it SIX TIME PERFECTLY infront of a "live" audience!
This is really cool! I remember watching the 27-card trick (that uses base 3, because you make the same argument, but dividing it in 3 columns). In this one, we make a Faro shuffle, which is the same as dividing it in 2 parts, and we can work out ecerything in base 2. Brilliant! Great example of use of base 2.
This is the same exact trick as the one you showed a long time ago that uses 49 or 36 cards, except you use 2s instead of 3s. In the other one you would essentially do an inverse pharaoh shuffle, except you split the deck into 3 stacks instead of 2. Then you find the stack with the card you want, and put it on the top, middle, or bottom of the other 2 stacks, based on a ternary number representing the index you want the card to end up at. This trick is exactly the same! The differences are that you're only using two stacks, so the stack with your card in it can only go on the top or bottom -- therefore in and out shuffles, you're doing the whole trick essentially in reverse, and you're not showing the cards.
I was looking for something like this... except that he was looking for a card that was already in that position in the new deck, and then just false-shuffles every single time.
I have always used elmsley principles of faro only for moving the card from the top to position, this is a really clever complement to it, thanks, even some years ago I came upwith a trick using the symmetry principle also from elmsley I think
mod 51 is awkward thanks to the pigeonhole principle. mod 53 works because there are only 52 cards. While not appearing quite as elegant, you can do both IN and OUT transformations mod 52. IN: (2i+1-floor(i/26)) mod 52 OUT: (2i+floor(i/26)) mod 52
But does it work? Imagine we are looking at the last card and then performing an OUT. 51 -> 2*51 MOD 51 = 0. But 51 should stay at 51 for an OUT shuffle. Or am I mixing up IN and OUT?
@@totheknee Im not entirely sure I got everything right, but from what I can tell in David's comment above, it's mod 52, not mod 51 as you calculated. 51 mod 52 = 51, so 51 does stay at 51.
I'm at 16:00 and so far, the inverse version look a LOT like the the trick with the 27 cards where you bring any chosen card to any position, using ternary I always suspected that a version like that could work with the entire 52 card deck
Yeah it seems like the same math, the 27 card trick uses ternary instead of binary since it deals into 3 piles (which also prevents inverting it into a reasonable shuffle). A 3-pile perfect shuffle would be very impressive.
@@ngiorgos the trick is 1: make sure the deck is a multiple of 3 (the math is harder if the piles are different size) 2. Adjust placement based on pile size. 51 cards is 17 cards per pile, so the 28th card is card 11 in the middle stack.
I can palm, vanish and appear cards, know a few tricks card tricks and beyond too. I have NEVER been able to Farrow Shuffle properly. Much respect, especially being able to do it multiple times in a row.
I managed to catch the live stream, but I'd already forgotten you were doing a video on this, so it was a nice surprise to see today. Those animations by William are so good!
I was there for that rope trick live... it was awesome... though I had quite a delay in my stream so couldn't explode at the right time... Though my "side Matt" message made it...
Nice deck of cards! Steve Mould being J, holding a staff with Tau symbol; Helen Arney being Q, holding a guitar; and Matt Parker being K, holding a staff with Pi symbol... Oh, mentioned at 31:40. Turns out, it's an ukulele. (Yes, I prefer Hawaiian spelling OO-koo-LEH-leh, as stated on Wikipedia)
2:23 Oh look, there I am :) Even though I knew you knew what you were doing, it was still incredibly impressive to see you pull off the trick in front of hundreds of people, live!
I love that "Queen" has a guitar in the deck animations at the end (though it should be electric) Edit: got to the part where he explained who they were actually based on, nvm.
I haven't watched yet, but I'll say how I once designed an any card to any position trick. In 2012, I saw the 27 card trick shown by Matt on the Numberphile video 'Beautiful Card Trick' and extended it to all 52 cards and a chosen position. The audience choses a card and does not reveal it, and choses a number from 1 to 52 and tells me the number. Each round I deal the cards face up into piles (I can't remember how many piles), ask the audience which pile their card is in, and collect the cards. After (I think it was 3) 3 rounds, we count down the deck to their chosen number and there is their card. The 27 card trick places the card by encoding the position in base 3 by the position you collect the identified pile to when collecting the deck. The system for how to encode a position in my trick was more complicated because 52 didn't divide into the number of piles I dealt - basically just memorizing what the encoding is for each number. It would be possible to identify their card to position 1, and then move it, but that added either extra deals or slight of hand, and dealing 52 cards more than 3 times gets real boring.
Well, I remember making python code that shuffled and tracked the positions of the cards. I also forgot to finish up and figure out the algorithm Matt used which I planned on doing before this video came out. Cestlavie
The mastery required to do the math in your head and then execute a series of perfect riffle shuffles is astounding! Holy crap that is an impressive trick
If the trick relies on the order of cards in a fresh deck, you could get there much faster with a single cut. I guess if you're quick enough mentally, with enough diversion banter, doing it with shuffles will be more impressive to an observer.
This is basically the third video in the 'dream trilogy': Dream got lucky in Minecraft -> Bridge players got lucky with farrow shuffles -> Matt uses a farrow shuffle to do magic.
I've followed Matt from long before he decided to shave his head and I keep being impressed by the increased effort he's been putting into SFX like damn
I used to do a version of this trick with half a deck (26 cards) plus the joker, by notating deck location in base-3. Sorting into three piles on the table, getting the punter to point to the pile with their card in, which I then place in the location determined by each digit of the base-3 notation in reverse (repeating two more times) My spin on this is to also keep track of the joker, and make sure to place it earlier than the chosen card and remember its deck location. So whilst I'm dealing out the cards to the chosen number, I can turn over the joker without looking and say "jokers don't count", which conveniently means I don't have to do the -1 step and it adds an extra layer of patter to the trick.
One pretty small thing about the index. Instead of just saying it starts from zero, we can say that we are not looking at the *position* of the card, rather how many cards are on top of them. Therefore, it is the 17th card, but there are 16 cards on top of it. And we wanted it to go to 23th position, so that means there are 22 cards on top of it. Edit: Sorry, it is mentioned at 28:49
If I was doing this, I'd probably do the whole calculation in octal. The division by 52 (well, technically the search for a multiple) would still be a slow step, but every other calculation becomes almost free.
I remember being there for the original stream, I think the rope trick was actually ever so slightly more impressive than the card trick. Probably would reserve that one for a finisher if you did another magic set. Still amazed!
Something else that is new: ability to express one’s opinion (math solutions in this case) without going through journals and peer review. You get to see people’s research and “research” thought processes with no filter, fast. You get both recreational mathematics and recreational insanity, but it’s a lot faster than in the 50s.
"and it was just the one piece of rope the whole time" and chat going crazy has the same feeling as you cutting up a double moebius strip and screaming "A SQUARE!" and the live audicente going crazy
The ins and outs don't have different mods at all! You just have the plus one in the wrong place - you can write the in formula as (2i mod 51) + 1 and it all works out
So does this mean that if a card is ALREADY in its target position, you're still going to do 6 shuffles? In general there seems to be no shorter solution with your method where you effectively need less-than 6.
Well since you have to mentally figure out the starting and ending position anyway, you have an even more impressive trick where you do no shuffles and the card is in the right spot. You are right however where even if there is a way to get the card into position with one shuffle, this method will still have you do six shuffles.
@@returnexitsuccess Isnt there away where the deck is split, the stooge/whoever choses a card, its removed from the deck and placed at the top of the half deck it has come from ,the half packs then joined , shuffled and the card arrives at the location number you requested. ( same method really just a bit more thought)
The live stream was on my second channel and it happened without warning. th-cam.com/users/mattparker2 Well, I gave advanced notice to people who support me on Patreon. Join in and get a heads-up about other similar stuff: patreon.com/standupmaths
Patreon is well worth it. For anyone reading this not part of his Patreon -- join now (by Aug 7th, 2021), and get a free toroidal balloon mailed to you. I mean, if that doesn't entice you, I don't know what will.
1:20
I definitely read it as standup mathemagician
i think this one inst a parker square
YOU MONSTER! I am so mad that I was not aware of this livestream.
@@bretscofield are you his alternate account
Getting almost picked at 2:31 was a rollercoaster of emotions
😔
You coulda been a contender.
I was thinking of you when it happened
@@andrewandrus3296 Thank you, I appreciate it
😂
I love how Matt was entirely invested in reading chat while preforming the card magic trick. Well done!
Yes. I was gripped.
It's the perfect way to buy time.
Heh; subtle.
Indeed, excellent! :D
Cannot like this comment enough
After watching this livestream, I suggested that when live, in person shows are possible again, you do a true Berglass effect trick live. The odds of it working are 1/52. And given the nature of your show, having a trick that fails 51/52 times in order to get the best ever video of someone performing the holy grail of mathematics is just up your ally.
My magic peaked when I shuffled a deck of cards and my dad picked one and I said what it was, complete guess, he asked how I did it and I let him shuffle the deck and pick a card and I guessed it correct again, I was expecting to be wrong the second time and say that's how I did it - I guessed. Absolutely flawless performance I can't do again.
@@skylark.kraken lol that's awesome xD
I have a theory since I have been thinking about this for a very long time, where there are a few tricks to bump up that 1/52 chances. To start, you can actually move the cards up or down by not specifying in the beginning that the number to be "the card at that number" or" after dealing x amount of cards out of the deck, the top card is the specified card". Then there is the dealing from top or just flipping the deck. Also the advertising card and jokers could in theory be taken out as instructed. Since most magician never specified what exactly the audience should expect the effect to be, there are still rooms for magician to play with.
Hasn't Matt already done that?
It's a Parker trick!
The Parker Shuffle:
Step 1. Split the card exactly in deck.
KNIFE.
I was looking for this. Parker syntax immediately came to mind.
Mmm yep this makes perfect sense
Faro shuffle is easy actually
Just some practice and you will be able to tell which packet has more cards not only visually, but even by weight unconsciously.
I love the look of relief when you got the right card, Also isn't funny how magicians have used the whole fact it was a brand new deck that was still sealed to show they didn't stack the deck but in reality they can only do it with a new deck.
I mean, you could always rearrange the cards to new deck order, just would be a lot of work and it would look suspicious if you claimed it was a randomly shuffled deck, so ya, you either need to not show the cards or annouch they are in new deck order.
Yup. Brand new decks come pre-stacked.
Or have a memorized or stacked deck, even there is some stacks that you can make from shuffling the brand new order and dont seem stacked because of the lack of paterns
That's the best kind of misdirection, make the thing that makes it easier/possible look like the thing that makes it harder.
There are decks that come pre stacked, not in the order that you think. To a layman, it looks like a normal shuffled deck. ACAAN can be performed even without the new deck order.
This trick is somehow even more impressive after knowing how it's done. Not only do you have to do all that math in your head while keeping up convincing patter, but then you have to do a difficult sleight of hand maneuver perfectly 6 consecutive times.
I can´t belive William Marler animates for Tom Scott AND you (and many more edu-tubers)
@@iseriver3982 I can see Matt telling him about this part's math and William just saying nope.
How do u know
And in one of his many Easter eggs, he's got a cameo as the joker card at 3:15 (and Matt said later that the other face cards are members of FotSN)
I’m still not used to people talking about me in comments 😂 thanks guys!
@@iseriver3982 Me ☺️
Matt Parker - Stand-up mathematician, sit down magician. I approve.
I dunno whether you'll find this or not, but I really want to give a big thanks to you Mr.Parker. You are among one of the many guys who has made me drawn more into this wonderful and surreal world of mathematics.
THANKS A LOT! 😊🙂
My pleasure! Glad you’re enjoying maths.
@@standupmaths Indeed I am!
Lol Matt is our guy, christmas tree still standing in the background in august.
I am still messing around with the code!
@@standupmaths Have you made all the bad code work yet?
@@Ninterd2 yeah some seemed cool in theory if they had worked
well it was shot in May, but yeah...
@@TrimutiusToo at this point he is prolly holding out on showing more of it til this christmas lol
The rope trick was so great. Feel sorry for anyone who missed it.
Mmm yes rope trick nice
😂 I didn't see any stream, but I have a feeling it's the classic Matt Parker
"guys I want you to go crazy in the chat when I hold up this rope and say my stupid line" 😁
I feel betrayed
@@rewrose2838 This was totally my thinking. 😂
@@rewrose2838 The stream's in the description, it was absolutely amazing. Never thought Matt could pull something like that off
Just HOW LUCKY is it that In and Out shuffles begin with I and O and map easily (visually) to 1 and 0... imagine it had been the other way around, that would be incredibly confusing!
In that case I guess you'd just need to use one's complement, A.K.A. NOT(number), and you'd be good again.
If it was the other way around, I’d just swap definitions of “In” and “Out” and it would work again.
Currently, we’re tracking the positions of the outside cards. If they stay first and last, it’s called an “out” and v.v. But if you track the positions of the INSIDE cards instead, then you can call it an “out” if an INSIDE card moves OUT to the first and last positions. Done. 1 is still In and 0 is still Out. Fixed.
He would have just done the whole video in opposite binary.
@@estherpettigrew3042 the definitions of 'in' and 'out' faro shuffling are in mathematical literature, so it's nontrivial to swap them 'just for this video'. But Matt could have named them something else that would still make the same visual coincidence/pun. Maybe 'lift' and 'quirk' because 'L' and 'Q' vaguely resemble binary digits, Matt'd think of something better than that.
It was impressive that he managed to do all that math in his head, especially the multiplying 16 by 64 bit
Binary adding without carry is also known as XOR or exclusive OR, where the output is 1 if both inputs are different.
thanks for that simple explanation I always wondered what it meant.
Correct, but the output is also 1 if one input is different. From the other input, that is.
(Referring to video position around 6:00.)
@@Karolomen Well, that's the same he said 😂😂
It might be a bit easier to understand if you say "bitwise XOR" instead of "bitwise ADD" since the xor carries no implication of... well...carrying.
This is the comment I was looking for.
No need for me to post my own comment to this effect.
Morgan Harris mentioned in their comment that the plus sign in the intro card @ 1:20 kind of looks like the XOR symbol (i.e. "standup ⊕ mathematician")
What an easter egg! (Parker's XOR?)
i found the/a neccessary XOR comment!
I thought it is just me that is a bitconfused (pun intended) by bitwise ADD. Apparently not.
Oh my goodness, seeing the little bits of math scribbled out on an open, empty envelope was the most relatable math thing I've ever seen
As a magician, I can certainly say that your Faro Shuffle is better than most non-magicians! (When you were first learning it, I'm betting it took you a long time before you could perform the technique consistently, right? I know it definitely did for me!)
Honestly, his faro is a lot better than many magicans i've seen too.
I loved the moment it went from seriously seriously tricky to something that was just locked in though. Table faro next time I’m stuck with a deck and a pile of time.
I think Matt qualifies as being a magician. I don't know if he's done any tricks at Festival of the Spoken Nerd, so he might be an amateur magician. He's definitely done math-based tricks on this channel before.
Love that the back on the envelope calculations are graphically shown as such:)
😂 I didn't see any stream, but I have a feeling it's the classic Matt Parker...
"guys I want you to go crazy in the chat when I hold up this rope and say my stupid line"
Ah. No comment.
Matt, you inspired me to do a boat load of work on ellipse circumferences over quarantine. Ive beat Ramanujan a couple times and i have some new ellipse integrals.
You gotta publish that, man
"Put the card exactly in deck"
Now that's a Parker sentence.
split*
That was a Parker citation
@@excelmaster2496*quotation
Being a hobbyist magician I was well familiar with the Elsmey count. Being a computer scientist by trade, I've only just discovered today that Alex Elmsley was also a mathematician who published a lot of mathematics papers. Mind: blown.
Magicians have been known to practice a trick like this for hours a day every day for years before they’re confident enough to do it in front of an audience.
If there is one thing we know about Matt Parker by now, it's that he's not afraid to be wrong in front of an audience.
I do a little bit of card Magic and I just gotta give you props for having a pharao shuffle good enough for you not to be nervous doing it SIX TIME PERFECTLY infront of a "live" audience!
I still remember the rope trick. It was the highlight of 2021 so far. CRAZY
Physics will never recover
This is the earliest I have watched any Stand-up Maths video.
Indeed
I don't even remember subscribing to this channel
I think it's really impressive how Matt was able to do the multiples of 52 and 64 in his head *while* reading chat!
Ah, we have ourselves a Parker shuffle! It's a pain though, you've gotta be able to split the card exactly in deck, you've got to interweave them.
Ah, Beat me to it haha
Not a Parker shuffle. It works perfectly
@@andywright8803 technically it isn't actually a shuffle, as you can keep track of where all the cards go.
jetison333 no, it is a shuffle,there is no rules that said a shuffle had to randomize the deck
And it is called Faro shuffle
I remember watching this stream. The connection didn't work out in the beginning but the trick was amazing!
The audio to that extended intro makes me smile every time. Love it.
The most impressive thing about this is the fact that matt can consistently do perfect riffle shuffles lmao
Brand new deck, remember? He *needs* it to be new!
Totally amazing that you memorized the 52 and 64 times tables. Very impressive!! ;-)
I know right? Can't believe how effortless it was, too!
Within a single day no less
This is really cool! I remember watching the 27-card trick (that uses base 3, because you make the same argument, but dividing it in 3 columns).
In this one, we make a Faro shuffle, which is the same as dividing it in 2 parts, and we can work out ecerything in base 2. Brilliant! Great example of use of base 2.
This is the same exact trick as the one you showed a long time ago that uses 49 or 36 cards, except you use 2s instead of 3s. In the other one you would essentially do an inverse pharaoh shuffle, except you split the deck into 3 stacks instead of 2. Then you find the stack with the card you want, and put it on the top, middle, or bottom of the other 2 stacks, based on a ternary number representing the index you want the card to end up at. This trick is exactly the same! The differences are that you're only using two stacks, so the stack with your card in it can only go on the top or bottom -- therefore in and out shuffles, you're doing the whole trick essentially in reverse, and you're not showing the cards.
Conspiracy: there were over 52*52 people in the chat and Matt looked through every comment to find one that he knew how to do
I was looking for something like this... except that he was looking for a card that was already in that position in the new deck, and then just false-shuffles every single time.
I have always used elmsley principles of faro only for moving the card from the top to position, this is a really clever complement to it, thanks, even some years ago I came upwith a trick using the symmetry principle also from elmsley I think
It was impressive being able to calculate multiples of 52 and 64 on the fly like that. Good show!
The -1 holes balloon floating out of Matt's head was just hilarious to me 😂😂
mod 51 is awkward thanks to the pigeonhole principle.
mod 53 works because there are only 52 cards.
While not appearing quite as elegant, you can do both IN and OUT transformations mod 52.
IN: (2i+1-floor(i/26)) mod 52
OUT: (2i+floor(i/26)) mod 52
But does it work? Imagine we are looking at the last card and then performing an OUT. 51 -> 2*51 MOD 51 = 0. But 51 should stay at 51 for an OUT shuffle. Or am I mixing up IN and OUT?
@@totheknee Im not entirely sure I got everything right, but from what I can tell in David's comment above, it's mod 52, not mod 51 as you calculated. 51 mod 52 = 51, so 51 does stay at 51.
Nice, one of the first cards suggested was 3♣, you know you have classy viewers
I'm at 16:00 and so far, the inverse version look a LOT like the the trick with the 27 cards where you bring any chosen card to any position, using ternary
I always suspected that a version like that could work with the entire 52 card deck
I thought about it as well!
Yeah it seems like the same math, the 27 card trick uses ternary instead of binary since it deals into 3 piles (which also prevents inverting it into a reasonable shuffle). A 3-pile perfect shuffle would be very impressive.
The ternary trick works for up to 81 cards with a 4th lay out of the cards.
@@aaronbredon2948 yeah, after that I tried to see if a 4th lay out can make it work with 52 cards. Since 52
@@ngiorgos the trick is
1: make sure the deck is a multiple of 3 (the math is harder if the piles are different size)
2. Adjust placement based on pile size. 51 cards is 17 cards per pile, so the 28th card is card 11 in the middle stack.
I can palm, vanish and appear cards, know a few tricks card tricks and beyond too. I have NEVER been able to Farrow Shuffle properly. Much respect, especially being able to do it multiple times in a row.
As a closeup magician, who does mainly cards effects, i love this! :D
I managed to catch the live stream, but I'd already forgotten you were doing a video on this, so it was a nice surprise to see today. Those animations by William are so good!
Oh, I remember that live stream. That rope trick really WAS amazing!
Hi Matt, I think this application to be the new Masked Magician is great!
Impressive feat and the fact that you remembered all the calculations.
Only checked the stream video to verify that the rope trick was done exactly like I thought it was. It was. Well executed.
2:45 Shoutout to Jonathan Tanner’s suggestion. Good to see another Penn & Teller and Hitchhiker’s Guide fan
without relooking at the video to confirm that would be the 3 of clubs and position 42
I remember that rope trick. That was AMAZING! Gotta check out the original stream for sure.
That was all for the trick!
Wow, that shuffling is really satisfying to watch
I am disproportionately proud of you as well, Matt
I find it quite interesting that because the in and out shuffles are always symmetric, you cannot get any random shuffle from the perfect shuffles.
Honestly, your channel is gold!
I love your videos and your books, you have been getting me fascinated with maths.
I was there for that rope trick live... it was awesome... though I had quite a delay in my stream so couldn't explode at the right time... Though my "side Matt" message made it...
Nice deck of cards! Steve Mould being J, holding a staff with Tau symbol; Helen Arney being Q, holding a guitar; and Matt Parker being K, holding a staff with Pi symbol... Oh, mentioned at 31:40. Turns out, it's an ukulele. (Yes, I prefer Hawaiian spelling OO-koo-LEH-leh, as stated on Wikipedia)
How else would you spell ukulele?
Also William Marler as the joker visible at 3:16
I have just read the card tricks section of Things to Make and Do in the Fourth Dimension, which is where I thought this was going to start with
Oh wow, it's been a long time. That rope trick was absolutely mind-blowing.
Shoutout to all the folks who were part of the audience cheering and clapping and being astonished by the tricks that totally happened.
2:23 Oh look, there I am :)
Even though I knew you knew what you were doing, it was still incredibly impressive to see you pull off the trick in front of hundreds of people, live!
1:14 caught me off guard in the best way. I love your theme
Man, you have such good production quality. Enjoy every video.
Matt Parker is basically if Michael Palin traveled back in time and took up mathematics.
I love that "Queen" has a guitar in the deck animations at the end (though it should be electric)
Edit: got to the part where he explained who they were actually based on, nvm.
The intro quality is getting out of hand!
It is seriously impressive how fast you did all that math live
I haven't watched yet, but I'll say how I once designed an any card to any position trick. In 2012, I saw the 27 card trick shown by Matt on the Numberphile video 'Beautiful Card Trick' and extended it to all 52 cards and a chosen position. The audience choses a card and does not reveal it, and choses a number from 1 to 52 and tells me the number. Each round I deal the cards face up into piles (I can't remember how many piles), ask the audience which pile their card is in, and collect the cards. After (I think it was 3) 3 rounds, we count down the deck to their chosen number and there is their card.
The 27 card trick places the card by encoding the position in base 3 by the position you collect the identified pile to when collecting the deck. The system for how to encode a position in my trick was more complicated because 52 didn't divide into the number of piles I dealt - basically just memorizing what the encoding is for each number. It would be possible to identify their card to position 1, and then move it, but that added either extra deals or slight of hand, and dealing 52 cards more than 3 times gets real boring.
Well, I remember making python code that shuffled and tracked the positions of the cards.
I also forgot to finish up and figure out the algorithm Matt used which I planned on doing before this video came out.
Cestlavie
Can you hack where microsoft solitaire plays on its own to shuffle the deck to give a perfect initial layout ?
The mastery required to do the math in your head and then execute a series of perfect riffle shuffles is astounding! Holy crap that is an impressive trick
I remember that livestream, that rope trick was amazing!
If the trick relies on the order of cards in a fresh deck, you could get there much faster with a single cut. I guess if you're quick enough mentally, with enough diversion banter, doing it with shuffles will be more impressive to an observer.
Yeah, that's the way I do it
Great video... probably the hardest way to do the trick, but the maths behind is amazing!
What timing, I was just watching the Numberphile videos on card tricks when this popped up.
This is basically the third video in the 'dream trilogy': Dream got lucky in Minecraft -> Bridge players got lucky with farrow shuffles -> Matt uses a farrow shuffle to do magic.
Yup
Wait is it not spelled Pharaoh
@@OrangeC7 It's actually "Faro" shuffle, named after a french gambling game from the late 1600s
@@loreleihillard5078 oh, I thought it was banned after a person, cool.
I've followed Matt from long before he decided to shave his head and I keep being impressed by the increased effort he's been putting into SFX like damn
And it all began with the VFX explosion that was GLORIA IN X-SQUARIS
HOW ARE YOU PRODUCING GREAT VIDEOS SO FAST???
I used to do a version of this trick with half a deck (26 cards) plus the joker, by notating deck location in base-3.
Sorting into three piles on the table, getting the punter to point to the pile with their card in, which I then place in the location determined by each digit of the base-3 notation in reverse (repeating two more times)
My spin on this is to also keep track of the joker, and make sure to place it earlier than the chosen card and remember its deck location.
So whilst I'm dealing out the cards to the chosen number, I can turn over the joker without looking and say "jokers don't count", which conveniently means I don't have to do the -1 step and it adds an extra layer of patter to the trick.
That Space-Card intro was pure Fire!!!
One pretty small thing about the index.
Instead of just saying it starts from zero, we can say that we are not looking at the *position* of the card, rather how many cards are on top of them.
Therefore, it is the 17th card, but there are 16 cards on top of it. And we wanted it to go to 23th position, so that means there are 22 cards on top of it.
Edit: Sorry, it is mentioned at 28:49
Come on Matt there's no need to use multiple doublings (or other methods ;) ) to calculate 16*64. That's just power of two knowledge!!
True.
2⁴ × 2⁶ = 2⁸
But not every mathematician knows their powers of 2.
Edit: Including me, apparently. 2⁸ should be 2¹⁰
If I was doing this, I'd probably do the whole calculation in octal. The division by 52 (well, technically the search for a multiple) would still be a slow step, but every other calculation becomes almost free.
The intro sequence of this video slaps so hard!
I'm glad I watched you on the royal institute's channel and came to check out yours a year ago.
I remember being there for the original stream, I think the rope trick was actually ever so slightly more impressive than the card trick. Probably would reserve that one for a finisher if you did another magic set. Still amazed!
Matt you've honestly been spoiling us lately, I'm trying to study for my HSC maths trial!!
Something else that is new: ability to express one’s opinion (math solutions in this case) without going through journals and peer review. You get to see people’s research and “research” thought processes with no filter, fast. You get both recreational mathematics and recreational insanity, but it’s a lot faster than in the 50s.
"and it was just the one piece of rope the whole time" and chat going crazy has the same feeling as you cutting up a double moebius strip and screaming "A SQUARE!" and the live audicente going crazy
I came back from the bonus video to give a like for the rope trick.
Also, "I appreciate what you are doing". Subtle :D
The ins and outs don't have different mods at all! You just have the plus one in the wrong place - you can write the in formula as (2i mod 51) + 1 and it all works out
The thing is, he 0-indexed the cards.
Brilliant, Matt. Thank you.
That intro was EPIC!
You need to produce that deck. Orange backs looks vicious!
There's something ironic about "Maths on the Back of an Envelope" only being available in hardback
Faro Shuffle FTW - my favorite card trick. I learned this 30 years ago at a math conference.
Are we going to get festival of the spoken nerd deck of cards in the not too distant future?
So does this mean that if a card is ALREADY in its target position, you're still going to do 6 shuffles? In general there seems to be no shorter solution with your method where you effectively need less-than 6.
Well since you have to mentally figure out the starting and ending position anyway, you have an even more impressive trick where you do no shuffles and the card is in the right spot. You are right however where even if there is a way to get the card into position with one shuffle, this method will still have you do six shuffles.
@@returnexitsuccess Isnt there away where the deck is split, the stooge/whoever choses a card, its removed from the deck and placed at the top of the half deck it has come from ,the half packs then joined , shuffled and the card arrives at the location number you requested. ( same method really just a bit more thought)
Just do 8 perfect out shuffles and the whole deck is back to where it started.
I'm sure it's mentioned, but the bitwise operator you're using (bitwise and except don't carry) is an XOR operation (exclusive OR)
Thank you Jane Street.
Before watching the video I thought "Great, I can try this on people at work" but I quickly realized that our breaks aren't long enough.