Imagine having the possibility to view lectures from people of this quality of intellegence, one honor we should all admire! Thanks for posting this video.
This is what a great teacher is all about. I like Jacon Lurie's delivery and relaxing, yet inspiring way of teaching. Jacob Lurie has a comfortable zeal and energy level in his approach.
I hope someone has already given feedback along these lines, but I am quite bothered by the constant shifting of the camera to follow Professor Lurie instead of staying steady on recent things he points to or writes. The constant movement strains the eye, but does not provide anything (I can't speak for everyone, I guess, but I was not able to recover anything meaningful from the pattern of his back-and-forth pacing).
The camera-person is trying to make the image large enough to be seen, while including Jacob. Perhaps it would be better if they zoomed out while jacob is talking without doing any writing.
I liked his style. The movement conveyed his enthusiasm for his topic. There are alot of great stories out there about genius Professors and their quirks. I had one professor show up to the first day of Diff E Q and just stand there looking at his notes for like 5 minutes. And then he asked the students "What class is this?". Everyone laughed. The professor was just kidding around and he often did hilarious things like that.
Hi I'm not mathematician (don't know much about category theory or groups), but wondering if someone could explain the following point: Where do the Fourier Transform properties (such as equivalence of time-shifting and multiplication by a "scalar"/eigenfunction) come into view in the Category 2 look at representations?
If you understand it you don't need notes, I had a lecture course on Geometry and the professor didn't refer once to notes in 30 hours because he either knew it or could do the calculation on the spot to re-derive a result.
If you have an equivalence between two categories, it could imply that similar tools or ideas from one category can be applied to problems in the other category. Like modular forms and elliptic curves, to take a "well-known" example
Another example might be the duality of locally compact Hausdorff spaces and commutative C*-algebras, which gave rise to the field called noncommutative geometry, where (noncommutative) C*-algebras are regarded as some sort of (functions on) "noncommutative"-spaces. Much of the mathematics of modern quantum field theory is written in the language of NCG, which wouldn't exist if the equivalence of 2 categories (namely LCHaus^opp and abC*-alg) wouldn't have been discovered.
Instead of using his incredible genius to improve his own egoistic gaining, he is using it for man kind. Thank you for existing. You are a perfect role model for everyone.
BG typically refers to the classifying space of a group G. You can construct it by defining a one-object category whose morphism set Hom(•,•)=Aut(•)=G. For example if G=Z/2Z then the category would have a single object and one non-identity morphism f such that f•f=id. Then you take the geometric realization of the nerve of this category and get a topological space that you call BG. This process actually defines a functor from groups to topological spaces.
All numbers are abstractions. In category theory however they are actual objects as items and not collections of objects like sets, nor collections of operations and properties like fields or groups.
One of the great thing's about Lurry's presentation style is that the board is just supplemental. I listen to him while cleaning or driving and don't suffer any dizziness from watching him 😉
Your Fourier transform us classic for all vectors and sub vectors spaces are isomorphic or isotopic and abelian translation but it is wrong cause the conumdrums are not usi specific depending on which topographical relations interconplexes non abelians C we are dealings with .quite impressive teachings if great havard teachers .but Fourier transfirm us just numbers of maze abstracts teachings but not apps to real life specifics assets of hi tech researches futures if solving abelian and non abelians complexes vectorings designs of conumdrums .Fourier transform is only a tool nit the lever apps .sorry to be so non compliant to an classics but in life the classics are not compute classics .still havard must be right somewhere along the lines .you have great teachers but a little bit fonctionnaires .if Fourier transform apps to future aeronautics or not would it be the same .the answer is quite impressive fir nit to say hyoerdumbs even fir masters if the masters 45 dumbs.
His lecture is not interactive as if he is reviewing for himself. Very traditional way of teaching that only a few students can follow the teacher. Reviewing is not teaching. And also his constant navigation makes me distracted.
Imagine having the possibility to view lectures from people of this quality of intellegence, one honor we should all admire! Thanks for posting this video.
This is what a great teacher is all about. I like Jacon Lurie's delivery and relaxing, yet inspiring way of teaching. Jacob Lurie has a comfortable zeal and energy level in his approach.
The way he talks & explains is so much relaxing, kind, inspiring, nice and motivational :)
I truly enjoy Jacob Lurie's lectures.
Is that Serre in the front row asking a question at 44:10?
I really like that he summarized his talk @40:30 - 43:50.
Excellent mathematician but an even more excellent lecturer if that's possible.
Jacob is a great teacher!
He’s a genius
@@mlevy2429 of highest order
I hope someone has already given feedback along these lines, but I am quite bothered by the constant shifting of the camera to follow Professor Lurie instead of staying steady on recent things he points to or writes. The constant movement strains the eye, but does not provide anything (I can't speak for everyone, I guess, but I was not able to recover anything meaningful from the pattern of his back-and-forth pacing).
The camera-person is trying to make the image large enough to be seen, while including Jacob. Perhaps it would be better if they zoomed out while jacob is talking without doing any writing.
+Aniket Shah Yeah... I gave up watching it because of this.
The camera-person seems better in this video: vimeo.com/120708135
This just imply Jacob is handsome and the guy playing the camera was captivated by him! haha!
I liked his style. The movement conveyed his enthusiasm for his topic. There are alot of great stories out there about genius Professors and their quirks. I had one professor show up to the first day of Diff E Q and just stand there looking at his notes for like 5 minutes. And then he asked the students "What class is this?". Everyone laughed. The professor was just kidding around and he often did hilarious things like that.
Is that Serre at the lecture?
indeed
😮
great lecture, really enjoy his style
Can the cameraman focus on the blackboard?
Do you know that Jean-Pierre Serre is part of the audience, the old man asking at very final...
Jacob Lurie is such a badass.
christ, the camera operator didn't need to move every time Jacob moved and inch
Hi I'm not mathematician (don't know much about category theory or groups), but wondering if someone could explain the following point:
Where do the Fourier Transform properties (such as equivalence of time-shifting and multiplication by a "scalar"/eigenfunction) come into view in the Category 2 look at representations?
This is way beyond awesome
Is that Freeman Dyson at 0:24?
I thonk so!
Aula maravilhosa!
laila cristina
🇺🇸
Brilliant, but why did he only button the top button of his shirt?
it is homeomorphic to all buttons closed. so job done.
man you were a bit nervous but you nailed it!
how does he do all that without notes?
Cause he understands what he's talking about so well
If you understand it you don't need notes, I had a lecture course on Geometry and the professor didn't refer once to notes in 30 hours because he either knew it or could do the calculation on the spot to re-derive a result.
発表まで約1ヶ月半あると考えてます。発表までに曲線の長さ、図形の面積、回転体の体積の学習を終わらせておこうと考えてます。
Ok, I'm being a bit naive but what is the point of category 2 theorems?
If you have an equivalence between two categories, it could imply that similar tools or ideas from one category can be applied to problems in the other category. Like modular forms and elliptic curves, to take a "well-known" example
Another example might be the duality of locally compact Hausdorff spaces and commutative C*-algebras, which gave rise to the field called noncommutative geometry, where (noncommutative) C*-algebras are regarded as some sort of (functions on) "noncommutative"-spaces. Much of the mathematics of modern quantum field theory is written in the language of NCG, which wouldn't exist if the equivalence of 2 categories (namely LCHaus^opp and abC*-alg) wouldn't have been discovered.
Awesome lecture!
How did I end up here
Why does he keep looking at the ceiling
Maybe God of mathematics tells him something
To make sure God is taking down notes!
He's looking at *higher* categories
@@rv706 dang you got it haha! ;)
Autism
Instead of using his incredible genius to improve his own egoistic gaining, he is using it for man kind. Thank you for existing. You are a perfect role model for everyone.
Huh?
What are you talking about? Virtually every mathematics professor has to teach.
Mankind needs food, freedom, peace, interesting work and finances. It does not need isomorphism between two vector spaces.
@@edwardjones2202 No agriculture without automatic machines, no automatic machines without GPS, no GPS without isomorphism between two vector spaces.
@@u.v.s.5583 i would've believed you like 200 years ago but this stuff no one needs most likely, people just need peace and happy life
Is lamda important?
Still don't get what BG is supposed to mean
BG typically refers to the classifying space of a group G. You can construct it by defining a one-object category whose morphism set Hom(•,•)=Aut(•)=G. For example if G=Z/2Z then the category would have a single object and one non-identity morphism f such that f•f=id. Then you take the geometric realization of the nerve of this category and get a topological space that you call BG. This process actually defines a functor from groups to topological spaces.
1:00 category number 0
미래엔 이 사실을 태어나자마자 알게되겠죠.
Jacob does Not Need Andy Fitness Training After Holding lectures!
Where can I read about this?
nLab!
@@offYears what is nlab? Is it a youtube channel or some website?
@@subhasispanda5039 website
Lurie has books on higher category theory but they are fairly unreadable.
Cool to have clear speaking young lecturer rather than old, hard to understand Russian or Chinese lecturers.
Zero is not concrete, its the abstraction.
All numbers are abstractions. In category theory however they are actual objects as items and not collections of objects like sets, nor collections of operations and properties like fields or groups.
All I was looking for was some diagrams with objects and arrows, but I got a lot more fluff instead...otherwise genius. I am feeling very inadequate.
Professeur jacob
Does this guy have emphysema?
The lecture is straightforward enough, but his agitated delivery, hand throwing, and constant pacing back and forth are making me dizzy.
One of the great thing's about Lurry's presentation style is that the board is just supplemental. I listen to him while cleaning or driving and don't suffer any dizziness from watching him 😉
@@rickynave he's trying
👌
Genius
Help help this person he's having a panic attack
将来はセクシー男優でもいいと考えてます。
経済学の勉強はしない方針です。
wow, what Cow :)
i have never seen a bigger aspie in my whole life
He is one.
MrVm1980 hes high on viagra and lsd
What kind of comment is this from the Jet Propulsion Lab? Fake Account
ziggityfriggity no this is the jpl
I've seen that movie... Star Cars
The way this guy talks is comic.
Your Fourier transform us classic for all vectors and sub vectors spaces are isomorphic or isotopic and abelian translation but it is wrong cause the conumdrums are not usi specific depending on which topographical relations interconplexes non abelians C we are dealings with .quite impressive teachings if great havard teachers .but Fourier transfirm us just numbers of maze abstracts teachings but not apps to real life specifics assets of hi tech researches futures if solving abelian and non abelians complexes vectorings designs of conumdrums .Fourier transform is only a tool nit the lever apps .sorry to be so non compliant to an classics but in life the classics are not compute classics .still havard must be right somewhere along the lines .you have great teachers but a little bit fonctionnaires .if Fourier transform apps to future aeronautics or not would it be the same .the answer is quite impressive fir nit to say hyoerdumbs even fir masters if the masters 45 dumbs.
His lecture is not interactive as if he is reviewing for himself. Very traditional way of teaching that only a few students can follow the teacher. Reviewing is not teaching. And also his constant navigation makes me distracted.