Support the production of this course by joining Wrath of Math as a Channel Member for exclusive and early videos, original music, and upcoming lecture notes for the graph theory series! th-cam.com/channels/yEKvaxi8mt9FMc62MHcliw.htmljoin Graph Theory course: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html Graph Theory exercises: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXtYASoshtU3yEKqEmo1o1L.html
I'm not sure what you mean by "devoid of theory and definitions" as I find this theoretical math packed with both. But I agree it is a highly unique subject! The proofs of graph theory were often quite different from other proofs I had seen when I started studying.
My pleasure, thanks for watching! Check out my Graph Theory playlist if you're looking for more: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html Many lessons still to come!
A super fun ( not really) recommendation: How to create a equation of a parabola using only a focus and a directrix, this would be helpful for me :) Gracías
'Walk is a sequence of vertices in a graph where consecutive vertices are adjacent.' - why does it qualify as a walk if V4 and V5 are not connected? Should the word consecutive be used then? Thank you!
Hey Sean, Thank you for the videos ~ you are helping me a lot. I have a question / questions: 1) Would you consider a trivial walk: open or close? I feel it should be close 2) Should Paths have a minimum length of 1? I feel yes, else if we allow paths to have length 0 then we would end up repeating vertices, which would go against the definition of path Please and Thank You!
1) A trivial walk would be closed. By definition, a closed walk has the same starting point as the end point. This is true since the first point will also be the last in a trivial walk. 2) Having the path be length 0 wouldn't necesarilly repeat vertices. It's still just 1 vertex, the starting/ending vertex. However, in a non-simple graph where perhaps there is a loop, an edge that connects a vertex to itself, then a path of (v1, v1) would be invalid since you do repeat a vertex. Either way, a path of length 0 is valid.
Thank you! Check out my Graph Theory playlist if you're looking for more! th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html Many more lessons to come!
Haha, thank you! If you haven't already checked it out, you may find my graph theory playlist useful: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html
thank you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Support the production of this course by joining Wrath of Math as a Channel Member for exclusive and early videos, original music, and upcoming lecture notes for the graph theory series!
th-cam.com/channels/yEKvaxi8mt9FMc62MHcliw.htmljoin
Graph Theory course: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html
Graph Theory exercises: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXtYASoshtU3yEKqEmo1o1L.html
Graph theory is the most theoretical thing I've ever studied. I'm glad pure mathematics is devoid of theory and definitions.
I'm not sure what you mean by "devoid of theory and definitions" as I find this theoretical math packed with both. But I agree it is a highly unique subject! The proofs of graph theory were often quite different from other proofs I had seen when I started studying.
So far I've really been enjoying my *walk* through this graph theory playlist 👍
thanks for all the videos that are posted on the graph theory, they helped me a lot for my final exam.
Happy to help!
How'd the class go overall, and do you think you'll ever encounter graph theory again in the future?
Thanks so much for all the time you put into these videos, they are most certainly helpful.
Thank you, this makes the topic so much clearer
My pleasure, thanks for watching! Check out my Graph Theory playlist if you're looking for more: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html
Many lessons still to come!
I'm really appreciated this full content, u explained this VERY WELL, thank you!
Glad to help! Thanks for watching and check out my graph theory playlist for more! th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html
my discrete mathematics final is tomorrow, glad I found this series today 🤣
How'd your final go?
A super fun ( not really) recommendation: How to create a equation of a parabola using only a focus and a directrix, this would be helpful for me :) Gracías
It sounds super fun to me! With any luck, I can record it tomorrow and it will be out Wednesday. Fingers crossed and thank you for the recommendation!
Here it is!
th-cam.com/video/HdQA84eqnlM/w-d-xo.html
Hehe.
"trivial it may be, it is a walk!" Nice one
Hey Sean, I hope you know you are my discrete math professor.
Glad to help! 😊
'Walk is a sequence of vertices in a graph where consecutive vertices are adjacent.' - why does it qualify as a walk if V4 and V5 are not connected? Should the word consecutive be used then? Thank you!
Hey Sean, Thank you for the videos ~ you are helping me a lot. I have a question / questions:
1) Would you consider a trivial walk: open or close? I feel it should be close
2) Should Paths have a minimum length of 1? I feel yes, else if we allow paths to have length 0 then we would end up repeating vertices, which would go against the definition of path
Please and Thank You!
1) A trivial walk would be closed. By definition, a closed walk has the same starting point as the end point. This is true since the first point will also be the last in a trivial walk.
2) Having the path be length 0 wouldn't necesarilly repeat vertices. It's still just 1 vertex, the starting/ending vertex. However, in a non-simple graph where perhaps there is a loop, an edge that connects a vertex to itself, then a path of (v1, v1) would be invalid since you do repeat a vertex. Either way, a path of length 0 is valid.
What is the name of the program that u used in this video?
Well explained!
Thank you! Check out my Graph Theory playlist if you're looking for more! th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html Many more lessons to come!
Mans accurately describes the wock.
Sir in second graph how walk is trivial ? Because first we are going from u yo v and then v to w
He mentioned w = (v) which means that he did not travel from u to v or v to w. That is why it was trivial as that walk has a length of 0.
if a vertex got a loop, we could say that: W = (V1, V1, V1) thus having a length of 3 riight?
great video +1, sub
goat
Haha, thank you! If you haven't already checked it out, you may find my graph theory playlist useful: th-cam.com/play/PLztBpqftvzxXBhbYxoaZJmnZF6AUQr1mH.html
thank you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!