@@EngineeringMadeEasy When you added S2 with S2 nth term is left without subtracting as the equation is shifted so, how the summation of S2 can be 1/2?
Finally, someone who noticed. To me, in the first place, it doesn't even make sense to consider the two possibilities of "Odd" and "Even" as they cannot describe an infinite summation. Only a finite countable number can be odd or even, not infinity. That is my opinion, maybe I just missed or misunderstood something.
@@haronjadid228 ur right, it's is important to mention that these aren't "traditional" sums but rather Cesàro summations. I'm in no way qualified to explain this so here's a Wikipedia definition. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ces%C3%A0ro_summation not the most accurate source but I think it's alright for a start.
Mathologer has a good phD pro-standard video debunking this mathematical misunderstanding. You can only get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by the process described in this video.
There's a big problem to start with: We cannot talk about the end of an infinite series, i.e. if the total number of items in a series is even or odd, since **infinity by definition has no end**. Actually, it has not even a start. So starting with 1 or whatever else has no meaning either.
Mathologer has a good phD pro-standard video debunking this mathematical misunderstanding. You can only get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by the process described in this video.
It ia mathematical joke . When sum of a infinite polynomial is divergent or convergent , infinity is valid . But when oscilitory then it has no solution .
How is this proof even right? S1 is having two value and the same time Than when we shift S2 series by one place than after S2+S2 first 1 in starting and last number that will be a big infinitely lastge number will be left after cancelling all 1 and -1 Than means S2= ( 1 + inf. Large number)/2 So much blunder but still it is said right. How sir please explain where am I going wrong?
"The Man Who Knew Infinity" movie ,The story of the life and academic career of the pioneer Indian mathematician, Srinivasa Ramanujan, and his friendship with his mentor, Professor G.H. Hardy ...
This makes no sense for some reasons. First, you keep increasing so how can the result be lower? If you add 1 to infinity (infinity + 1) it will simply expand not shrink. Secondly, why is a subtraction used on something that keeps increasing? You could simply use the odd numbers for the odd series (2 + 4 + 6 + etc). If I keep adding more and more apples in my basket, at some point I would have less than half apple? How?
Ramanujan knew numerical behavior, which is not taught in these days. We must cultivate the maths that we came from. Maths must be respected, it is pure as camphor.
I have no problem with the -1/12, but the equal sign requires the notion of a regularized sum. Stating that such sums are equal to a value, is only true given a method to assign a value, like Ramanujan Summation, or running average, or …. But that is not a “normal” summation. I also believe that what you are showing is NOT Ramanujan Summation. All of this is done quite well and complete by Mathologer, which I would recommend to view.
This is a mathematical gimmick and to prove it, you are one time taking even number of terms and then taking odd number of terms.In our school days We were proving 4=5.We were taking recourse to the fact that square root of a perfect square number is both Plus and and Minus. I love Ramanujan for his Partition Theory of Numbers.
If you are assuming S1 as even than how can you assume Same S1 for odd number, both series consist different number of 1or -1, at the same time S1 having 2 values, which is incorrect.
@@gunshotprogaming4527 Try to understand what he is trying to say. He has taken last term as odd in one equation and even in other one that means the no of terms are not same in both the equations so, how can you say that both equations equals to S1?
but both are upto infinity it's not mathematically incorrect, because: S1= 1-1+1-1+1-1 any number of times will be 0 and S2=1-1+1-1+1-1 any number of times will also be 0. so you're trying to say that 0≠0? I think that 0=0 is an obvious fact S1 and S2 are nothing but 0's being added infinite number of times if the number being added is just 0, it doesn't make any difference as to how many times you add it, the result will be 0 only. from all dimensions and reasons, I believe that the assumption S1=S2 is mathematically correct.
So far so good Ramanujan was true legend and more of all the staunch bhakt of Bgagvati. However my question here is that why we had taken the substraction of the no. 1 till infinity? Moreover in s4 why did we shift the no.s to 1 place right for substracting them from s3? If we'd not followed this the outcome would'n different? There are more questions but wanted to start with the basic first. Thanks.
the equation makes no sense, and at the same time, the calculations make perfect sense. which further proves to me that either our current understanding of mathematics is flawed, infinity being a misconception, or that our universe does not make sense at a subatomic quantum level, or it is impossible to understand because of our limited understanding. great video and explanation as always 👌
this is my favorite science channel, next to numberphile. thank you so much for making all those videos on different topics in english 👏👏👏 greetings from Austria 🇦🇹
Every mathematician knows that you cannot equate the sum of a divergent series to some number, The error is already at the very beginning of the reasoning and e.g. the sum of 1-1+1-1....... is not equal to 0. Likewise S3 is not equal to 1+2+3..... etc. There is simply no such number. Rather, it was a joke by Ramanujan
@@msdppdsmI don't know if it was joke by Ramanujan, but another video (I mentioned) goes into deep math to show how the zeta stuff comes up with -1/12. But, it's not a sum, since its a divergent series, as you correctly stated.
🤔s¹ maybe fine but, how can both s² have two different value when they have same number. First s¹ is natural number when second is whole? How can they be added?
2:51 isnt the exact problem here. How can you just "shift" it. My argument would be that instead of 2S2, you now have S2_0*S2_1, because your start points are different. If were allowed to shift, why dont we try to shift it 1 more space? then the resualt of 2S2 be different from yours.
So many mathematical mumbo-jumbo, hocus-pocus steps here but conveniently violated the basic mathematical axiom of Addition Property of Equality (and by extension, Multiplication Property of Equality and all other mathematical properties of equalities). 1. The APE's use is limited to finite NUMBERS. Once you include infinity in the equation, you cannot use APE, otherwise you will get weird results, like this Ramanujan Summation. 2. Infinity is a CONCEPT, it is not a number. Hence it cannot be subjected to mathematical operations. How 'mathematicians' failed to see these is beyond me (I'm not a mathematician).
I didn't believe this, a sum is a sum. Luckily I found a more math pure explanation of this topic. On the Mathologer channel video "Numberphile v. Math: the truth about 1+2+3+...=-1/12"
How come S1 has even elements and again has odd elements then assume they are the same thing to get them summed and called S1 that will end up with S1=1/2 ?! Is Y = X equals Y = X + 1 ?!
There is something quite wrong with this paradox. If Ramanujan is working with numbers he is not working with the Infinite, he can't be working with the infinite because the Infinite has no numbers. He can only work with numbers after finding the frame of the numbers. You can't just write numbers if you don't know where are you placing them.
This is as foolish as proving 1=0 when you apply the wrong operations such as dividing by zero. Here, S1 and S2 serieses are the root of all evils. Infinity does not end in even or odd number of terms. That wrong assumption makes this absurdity possible. Just because something has the name of Ramanujan doesn't become true by default.
If you denote the continuous sequence of additions and subtraction as S, then S will stand for an endless or undefinable series of such arithmetic operations, but not a single and well-defined quantity. Hence, the result of the arithmetic operation as a single and well-defined quantity, after such nonsensical manipulations of human -invented defective notions of mathematics, and the endless series S are obviously 2 different values. An endless series of arithmetic operations, no matter whatever sort of arthrimatic operation it is, it will never ever stop to give any result So, An endless series of numbers and a number are two complete different mathematical notions. One is undefinable and the other is definable Therefore, once you have claimed that they are equal, you have also unconsciously claimed that you have been out of your mind. No need of any proof here If s = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 +... Going to infinity 4s = 4 + 8 + ... going to infinity could be possible, then it would be the same as claiming that that S = 4S, 1 = 4, 2= 8 , 3 =16, 4 =32 ... because the length from the starting point of the 2 endless series to infinity is the same or constant, and thus the number of additions of the first endless series and the number of additions of the 2nd endless series have to be the same for the length of the first endless series and that of the 2nd series to be the same because both of the endless series of additions start from the same starting point and stop at infinity, which is the same ending point Here are a 1-D visualisation of the 2 endless series of additions, which show that their lengths of addition operations have to be equal, while their numbers can be different C = 1--------------------------------------------infinity 4C= 4--------------------------------------------infinity It is obviously nonsense What's wrong with such nonsensical manipulation here is that the guy took advantage of the ambiguity of the notion of going to infinity, which is obviously an unknowable unknown or undefined value, to insert this baseless claim. But the 2:series of additions have to have the same number of additions because they both begin from the same starting point and ends at the same ending point. The ending point here is infinity, and there can be only one infinity, but not 2 infinites. Hence,the number of additions of the 1st endless series of additions and the number of additions of the 2nd endless series of additions have to be the same. Both of the resultant outcomes of the 2 endless series of additions have to be infinity, having to stop at infinity, because infinity is the largest possible value, although they have different terms in the same number of additions. So, his mathemstical statement is the same as claiming that 1=4, 2 =8, 3=16, 4 =32 because that is the only one way for the 2 endless series of the same number of additions to end up with the same final output, which has to be infinity, but that only one way is obviously totally absolutely absurd Ignorant human mathematicians have the same problem of misunderstanding of the actual roles of human-invented numbers, and considering the unknowable unknown or undefinable value "infinity" as a specific value in their nonsensical mathematical claims
How can the series S_1 be equal to 1 and equal to 0 at the same time? This is a divergent series because the limit as n approaches infinity of its nth partial sum (a_1+a_2+a_3+...a_n) does not exist. Therefore, the sum of the series S_1 does not exist. Your proof makes no sense.
No. This is not good maths, there are big holes in it. See Mathologer's video on the subject. You can only validly get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by this method.
Let say A = 1-1+1-1+1-1+1...... A = 1-(1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1.......) A = 1-A hence A = 1/2 This is the mistake in this video in this video, they Used A as S1
As Little mathematics enthusiastic child when you shifted the series of addition by one(S2) i was like " ye to cheating hai" sir you could atleast tell that why it is done to just prove or something solid reason behind it (😁😁)
This type of proving a "Series" is 100% wrong. Infinty is not a number it's a concept. As to me whatever the largest number takes the highest Decimal point which maybe if we asume if it was the last number in infinity; then it's become Infinity too. So as Infinity defined as a Concept; it may remain as , 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+...+(infinity) = (infinity)
This "proof" is mathematical nonsens! Like all the other countless copies of the original 'numberphile' video are. This juggling around with divergent series has nothing to do with your famous Indian fellow Srinivasa Ramanujan and his brilliant and ingenious ideas. 🙂👻
Mathologer has a good phD pro-standard video debunking this mathematical misunderstanding. You can only get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by the process described in this video.
Lol i respect ramanujan but in this. Case he is absolutely wrong...... I am not a Great mathematician like him but as a student my opinion is against. Him in this. Case
![[UNCUT] “อภิสิทธิ์” ครม.อุ๊งอิ๊ง แย่งเก้าอี้กันฝุ่นตลบ “ทักษิณ” บงการเอง Iคนดังนั่งเคลียร์I 21ส.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/a_b-kItw2jY/mqdefault.jpg)
That was the simplest explanation I’ve seen yet. Well done. It’s a shame he died so young.
Thank you so much. Yes, that's so sad.
@@EngineeringMadeEasy When you added S2 with S2 nth term is left without subtracting as the equation is shifted so, how the summation of S2 can be 1/2?
How can we take two equations as a same variable (s1) as their sum is different ?
Correct.
Finally, someone who noticed. To me, in the first place, it doesn't even make sense to consider the two possibilities of "Odd" and "Even" as they cannot describe an infinite summation. Only a finite countable number can be odd or even, not infinity. That is my opinion, maybe I just missed or misunderstood something.
@@haronjadid228 ur right, it's is important to mention that these aren't "traditional" sums but rather Cesàro summations. I'm in no way qualified to explain this so here's a Wikipedia definition.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ces%C3%A0ro_summation
not the most accurate source but I think it's alright for a start.
S1 with odd and even count can't be same and hence can't be added to get 2s2
Mathologer has a good phD pro-standard video debunking this mathematical misunderstanding. You can only get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by the process described in this video.
There's a big problem to start with: We cannot talk about the end of an infinite series, i.e. if the total number of items in a series is even or odd, since **infinity by definition has no end**.
Actually, it has not even a start. So starting with 1 or whatever else has no meaning either.
Mathologer has a good phD pro-standard video debunking this mathematical misunderstanding. You can only get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by the process described in this video.
exactly, any infinite series without a unique solution cannot be added like shown in the video
@@onekebabpls4236 ..what is the reason
It ia mathematical joke . When sum of a infinite polynomial is divergent or convergent , infinity is valid . But when oscilitory then it has no solution .
How is this proof even right?
S1 is having two value and the same time
Than when we shift S2 series by one place than after S2+S2 first 1 in starting and last number that will be a big infinitely lastge number will be left after cancelling all 1 and -1
Than means S2= ( 1 + inf. Large number)/2
So much blunder but still it is said right. How sir please explain where am I going wrong?
Correct.
"The Man Who Knew Infinity" movie ,The story of the life and academic career of the pioneer Indian mathematician, Srinivasa Ramanujan, and his friendship with his mentor, Professor G.H. Hardy ...
Loved that movie ❤️
But how can S1 be equal to 0 ( when the series has EVEN no. of terms ) and be equal to 1 ( when ODD ) at the same time?
..... in the very beginning
This makes no sense for some reasons. First, you keep increasing so how can the result be lower? If you add 1 to infinity (infinity + 1) it will simply expand not shrink. Secondly, why is a subtraction used on something that keeps increasing? You could simply use the odd numbers for the odd series (2 + 4 + 6 + etc).
If I keep adding more and more apples in my basket, at some point I would have less than half apple? How?
Exactly. 1+2+3+...infinity is a divergent series which, by definition and common sense, has no finite limit and therefore no finite sum.
Ramanujan knew numerical behavior, which is not taught in these days. We must cultivate the maths that we came from. Maths must be respected, it is pure as camphor.
I have no problem with the -1/12, but the equal sign requires the notion of a regularized sum. Stating that such sums are equal to a value, is only true given a method to assign a value, like Ramanujan Summation, or running average, or …. But that is not a “normal” summation.
I also believe that what you are showing is NOT Ramanujan Summation.
All of this is done quite well and complete by Mathologer, which I would recommend to view.
At 3.57 you write conveniently as 1-1+1-1+1-1+1. How can it be? It will be 1+7
What did you do with that last 7. Check it
If he were alive for more years, I think that he would have proved the absolute reality...
When you are sum of two S2 series, how can you shift one S2 series? can you explain it to me....
This is a mathematical gimmick and to prove it, you are one time taking even number of terms and then taking odd number of terms.In our school days We were proving 4=5.We were taking recourse to the fact that square root of a perfect square number is both Plus and and Minus.
I love Ramanujan for his Partition Theory of Numbers.
If you are assuming S1 as even than how can you assume Same S1 for odd number, both series consist different number of 1or -1, at the same time S1 having 2 values, which is incorrect.
Well he did it because a and b were neaded to find s as s need b and b needs a
@@gunshotprogaming4527 Try to understand what he is trying to say. He has taken last term as odd in one equation and even in other one that means the no of terms are not same in both the equations so, how can you say that both equations equals to S1?
but both are upto infinity
it's not mathematically incorrect, because:
S1= 1-1+1-1+1-1 any number of times will be 0
and
S2=1-1+1-1+1-1 any number of times will also be 0.
so you're trying to say that 0≠0?
I think that 0=0 is an obvious fact
S1 and S2 are nothing but 0's being added infinite number of times
if the number being added is just 0, it doesn't make any difference as to how many times you add it, the result will be 0 only.
from all dimensions and reasons, I believe that the assumption S1=S2 is mathematically correct.
So far so good Ramanujan was true legend and more of all the staunch bhakt of Bgagvati. However my question here is that why we had taken the substraction of the no. 1 till infinity? Moreover in s4 why did we shift the no.s to 1 place right for substracting them from s3? If we'd not followed this the outcome would'n different? There are more questions but wanted to start with the basic first. Thanks.
Appreciate your work
Thanks a lot 🙏😊
the equation makes no sense, and at the same time, the calculations make perfect sense. which further proves to me that either our current understanding of mathematics is flawed, infinity being a misconception, or that our universe does not make sense at a subatomic quantum level, or it is impossible to understand because of our limited understanding.
great video and explanation as always 👌
Thank you so much😊❤
this is my favorite science channel, next to numberphile. thank you so much for making all those videos on different topics in english 👏👏👏
greetings from Austria 🇦🇹
@@secretjazz93 That's really a great compliment. Thank you so much for loving my content and your support. Please stay in touch 😊🙏❤
Every mathematician knows that you cannot equate the sum of a divergent series to some number, The error is already at the very beginning of the reasoning and e.g. the sum of 1-1+1-1....... is not equal to 0. Likewise S3 is not equal to 1+2+3..... etc. There is simply no such number. Rather, it was a joke by Ramanujan
@@msdppdsmI don't know if it was joke by Ramanujan, but another video (I mentioned) goes into deep math to show how the zeta stuff comes up with -1/12. But, it's not a sum, since its a divergent series, as you correctly stated.
Clear & coherent content.
Thank you😊
🤔s¹ maybe fine but, how can both s² have two different value when they have same number. First s¹ is natural number when second is whole? How can they be added?
2:51 isnt the exact problem here. How can you just "shift" it. My argument would be that instead of 2S2, you now have S2_0*S2_1, because your start points are different. If were allowed to shift, why dont we try to shift it 1 more space? then the resualt of 2S2 be different from yours.
How can you sum s1 and s1 if they have diff values?
Without the complications the fibonicci sequence doesn't exist 369 3 will always add into itself and 9 is also the same right?
Dude.... what???
Why did you shifted the S2 sum to the right side. Such a rule doesn't exists in mathematics
That blew my mind! Incredible!
Great explanation 🎉👍
Thank you so much 😊❤
Keep up the good work
Sure, keep watching 😊
Thank you, my brain is dribbling out of my ears now. :-D LOL!
thanks
My brain works backwards but I see the 3 is taken out of the equation and doesn't fit in -1/12 equals take out 3 69
Just like division by zero is not allowed, addition and subtraction involving infinity is not allowed.
Infinity+infinity = infinity and not 2 infinity
So many mathematical mumbo-jumbo, hocus-pocus steps here but conveniently violated the basic mathematical axiom of Addition Property of Equality (and by extension, Multiplication Property of Equality and all other mathematical properties of equalities). 1. The APE's use is limited to finite NUMBERS. Once you include infinity in the equation, you cannot use APE, otherwise you will get weird results, like this Ramanujan Summation. 2. Infinity is a CONCEPT, it is not a number. Hence it cannot be subjected to mathematical operations. How 'mathematicians' failed to see these is beyond me (I'm not a mathematician).
Why that’s so counter intuitive?
So interesting 🦊thanks sir
You are welcome 😊🙏
Maybe there is something wrong with mathematics itself, we are so used to assuming it is infallible.
I didn't believe this, a sum is a sum. Luckily I found a more math pure explanation of this topic. On the Mathologer channel video "Numberphile v. Math: the truth about 1+2+3+...=-1/12"
Unfortunately infinite series mathematically CAN NOT be added or substracted or even multiplied like this.
it can be with convergent series but not with this ya this a faulty proof
Watch the debunking video: th-cam.com/video/YuIIjLr6vUA/w-d-xo.html
How come S1 has even elements and again has odd elements then assume they are the same thing to get them summed and called S1 that will end up with S1=1/2 ?!
Is Y = X equals Y = X + 1 ?!
Let say
A = 1-1+1-1+1-1+1......
A = 1-(1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1.......)
A = 1-A
hence A = 1/2
This is the mistake in this video
Amazing!!!
There is something quite wrong with this paradox. If Ramanujan is working with numbers he is not working with the Infinite, he can't be working with the infinite because the Infinite has no numbers.
He can only work with numbers after finding the frame of the numbers.
You can't just write numbers if you don't know where are you placing them.
Yes
O-Kyklop--I think your paradox is wrong.Because maths is not your subject.Switch to Commerce.
@@amitavadutta78
may be I do. But tell me first WHY my "paradox"(?) is wrong...whatever you mean by it.
@@amitavadutta78
That's it?
This is as foolish as proving 1=0 when you apply the wrong operations such as dividing by zero. Here, S1 and S2 serieses are the root of all evils. Infinity does not end in even or odd number of terms. That wrong assumption makes this absurdity possible. Just because something has the name of Ramanujan doesn't become true by default.
If you denote the continuous sequence of additions and subtraction as S, then S will stand for an endless or undefinable series of such arithmetic operations, but not a single and well-defined quantity. Hence, the result of the arithmetic operation as a single and well-defined quantity, after such nonsensical manipulations of human -invented defective notions of mathematics, and the endless series S are obviously 2 different values.
An endless series of arithmetic operations, no matter whatever sort of arthrimatic operation it is, it will never ever stop to give any result
So, An endless series of numbers and a number are two complete different mathematical notions. One is undefinable and the other is definable
Therefore, once you have claimed that they are equal, you have also unconsciously claimed that you have been out of your mind. No need of any proof here
If s = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 +... Going to infinity
4s = 4 + 8 + ... going to infinity
could be possible, then it would be the same as claiming that that S = 4S, 1 = 4, 2= 8 , 3 =16, 4 =32 ... because the length from the starting point of the 2 endless series to infinity is the same or constant, and thus the number of additions of the first endless series and the number of additions of the 2nd endless series have to be the same for the length of the first endless series and that of the 2nd series to be the same because both of the endless series of additions start from the same starting point and stop at infinity, which is the same ending point
Here are a 1-D visualisation of the 2 endless series of additions, which show that their lengths of addition operations have to be equal, while their numbers can be different
C = 1--------------------------------------------infinity
4C= 4--------------------------------------------infinity
It is obviously nonsense
What's wrong with such nonsensical manipulation here is that the guy took advantage of the ambiguity of the notion of going to infinity, which is obviously an unknowable unknown or undefined value, to insert this baseless claim. But the 2:series of additions have to have the same number of additions because they both begin from the same starting point and ends at the same ending point. The ending point here is infinity, and there can be only one infinity, but not 2 infinites. Hence,the number of additions of the 1st endless series of additions and the number of additions of the 2nd endless series of additions have to be the same. Both of the resultant outcomes of the 2 endless series of additions have to be infinity, having to stop at infinity, because infinity is the largest possible value, although they have different terms in the same number of additions. So, his mathemstical statement is the same as claiming that 1=4, 2 =8, 3=16, 4 =32 because that is the only one way for the 2 endless series of the same number of additions to end up with the same final output, which has to be infinity, but that only one way is obviously totally absolutely absurd
Ignorant human mathematicians have the same problem of misunderstanding of the actual roles of human-invented numbers, and considering the unknowable unknown or undefinable value "infinity" as a specific value in their nonsensical mathematical claims
Ramanujan paradox! Sure...
How can the series S_1 be equal to 1 and equal to 0 at the same time? This is a divergent series because the limit as n approaches infinity of its nth partial sum (a_1+a_2+a_3+...a_n) does not exist. Therefore, the sum of the series S_1 does not exist. Your proof makes no sense.
As a person who loved Math since I was a child, I just can't accept this, my mind can't accept this, complete rubbish if you ask me
No. This is not good maths, there are big holes in it. See Mathologer's video on the subject. You can only validly get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by this method.
Why we take first term as zero in Eq(b) in S2 case. Wrong explanation.
Let say
A = 1-1+1-1+1-1+1......
A = 1-(1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1.......)
A = 1-A
hence A = 1/2
This is the mistake in this video
in this video, they Used A as S1
red S1 + green S1 does not equal 2*S1.
Stop killing science ... if you can not do good, please do not harm mathematics. Stop talking nonsense.
You cant assign a value to divergent series. so yeah this result isnt real
You cant take take a diverging series as constant
As Little mathematics enthusiastic child when you shifted the series of addition by one(S2) i was like " ye to cheating hai" sir you could atleast tell that why it is done to just prove or something solid reason behind it (😁😁)
There was no change in series on shifting, that's why it was named S2 series even after shifting.
@@EngineeringMadeEasy What do you mean? The whole infinity was shifted by one place!
@@EngineeringMadeEasy Why not shift it by infinit place then?
Your proof is wrong in very 1st step. How can be s1 once 0 and once 1.That will make 0 =1.Please don't spread confusions.
Let say
A = 1-1+1-1+1-1+1......
A = 1-(1-1+1-1+1-1+1-1+1.......)
A = 1-A
hence A = 1/2
This is the mistake in this video
Makes no sense. you can't keep adding and get a negative number.
This means THERE ARE SOME SECRET IN MATHS PHY BUT AREN'T REVEAL by GOD he will reavela it at right time
This type of proving a "Series" is 100% wrong. Infinty is not a number it's a concept. As to me whatever the largest number takes the highest Decimal point which maybe if we asume if it was the last number in infinity; then it's become Infinity too. So as Infinity defined as a Concept; it may remain as , 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+...+(infinity) = (infinity)
Remember this is totally wrong in the Topic of Series... so that's why this was been as A Paradox !!!
the man who knew -1/12
This "proof" is mathematical nonsens! Like all the other countless copies of the original 'numberphile' video are.
This juggling around with divergent series has nothing to do with your famous Indian fellow Srinivasa Ramanujan and his brilliant and ingenious ideas.
🙂👻
Rubbish with nonsense !!!!!! Infinity minus Infinity does not equal zero.
Mathologer has a good phD pro-standard video debunking this mathematical misunderstanding. You can only get to -1/12 by a process called analytic continuation, not by the process described in this video.
How can i contect you
lalithindaun@gmail.com
Try learning how to even spell contact before trying to contact someone.
I hate that you can't just get a degree atleast I can't in college it's frustrating:/
They couldn't have used a worse bot voice than the one in this video
Dude its his voice... not a bot
@@thekito4623 really? My bad
he is from india i think
I personally like the accent
3 doesn't exist
Lol i respect ramanujan but in this. Case he is absolutely wrong...... I am not a Great mathematician like him but as a student my opinion is against. Him in this. Case
bulshit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!