That was awesome. Might need to rewatch for it to fully stick in but this is the best intuitive explanation I've come across. I'd love to see how a more rigorous proof matches up with the logic used here.
Please donate to Khan Academy so that they can keep their good work and provide more free Education worldwide for our Children of the Beautiful Planet.
So what I inferred from the last part was that when the monocoloured beads are subtracted,then exactly 'a' no. of strings are removed.But a is supposed to be the no. of type of colours used.I am confused.... But otherwise it was a good explanation.
THe most intuitive explanation I've seen so far, now I'll never forget this theorem. Thank you!
This is an excellent demonstration.
It's an really Awesome combinatorial proof
Hats Off Khan Academy Labs!!!
That was awesome. Might need to rewatch for it to fully stick in but this is the best intuitive explanation I've come across. I'd love to see how a more rigorous proof matches up with the logic used here.
GORGEOUS !!!!!!
YOU MADE IT SO OBVIOUS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS !
Please donate to Khan Academy so that they can keep their good work and provide more free Education worldwide for our Children of the Beautiful Planet.
The most beautiful mathematical proof I have ever seen in my life
The 9th row in the 2:06 seems to be repeated with the 7th row :)
Yes, should have been 1001. That's the permutation that was missing.
@@wiscatbijles exactly!
2:00 Didn't you forget the sequence pyyp (p=purple, y=yellow) for the sequences containing 2 of each color?
Yeah, he accidentally counted yppy twice
you gotta be kidding me... this is awesome!
this is such a fucking good explanation
that was beautiful, thank you
Stunning explanation
Brit your videos allow me to understand, which sparks my interest in the subject, which opens up a whole new world to me.
They really are too good for not to generate interest for the topic.
This is stupendous!!💜
Amazing video!
Thank you sir, thank you...
Great Work!!
I never thought this way It was interesting
Great Explanation
Whoa it's true, works with any numbers
Wow, thank you so much😊
It divides evenly into cosets of size 3 which themselves groups but there is only one proper subgroup right?
Why does the last part of the explanation make sense? How does (a^p)|a = x remainder a ?
Oh shit! My university professors should watch these videos first before teaching us.
Sog!!
so can i say that the number of arrangemnts are n-1!/2
So what I inferred from the last part was that when the monocoloured beads are subtracted,then exactly 'a' no. of strings are removed.But a is supposed to be the no. of type of colours used.I am confused....
But otherwise it was a good explanation.
Abhijit Bhattacharyya Because for every color, there is one string that is only made up of beads of that color
0:33
😎
fucking amazing !!!
this rule doesn't seem fundamental to me
That was ridiculous
watching at 1.5 speed why u talk so slow...good video anyways