Відео

Are you talking about Wiles?

yeah (i guess), he moves like an elder man but he's young. he should work out more. i'd love that more.

Bro, that's pure hate

@@LuckyCrab_ it is

We will follow your advice and keep going 😎💪🏻

Let us know what you liked and what kind of content you’d like to see in the channel, please! 😎

@@dibeos u r doing great keep going

Awesome, I’m happy you like my beautiful accent 😎🤙🏻😂

🤦🏻‍♂️ man, you were really creative here, huh!? Hahaha how long did you take to come up with this BRILLIANT proof? 😂

Thanks Omar! We will keep making them 😎🤙🏻 let us know what type of content you are interested in

But I don’t think that this is taught this way only in Italy, in other parts of the world as well. The method we showed in the video though is the original one

The 7 things we selected are: 1. Pythagorean theorem 2. ⁠Euclid’s algorithm 3. ⁠Modular arithmetic 4. ⁠Fermat’s Last Theorem 5. ⁠Algebraic Number Theory 6. ⁠Analytic Number Theory 7. ⁠Geometric Number Theory

💪🏻😎

Thanks! We appreciate it, and we’ll keep on publishing. Let us know what you are interested in and what you liked specifically about the video (this way we can double on it) 😎🤙🏻

@dibeos i just liked how you two kept speaking with each other and explaining to us :) It felt like a natural conversation that I am part of. Most of my questions were asked, and you answered them all :)

@@lunarthicclipse8219 cool 😎

An elliptic curve can be expressed as (X/A)^2+(Y/B)^2=1 , where A and B can be any value. This way you can (for example) graph the ellipse and ask about the points that satisfy this equation, for different parameters (or degrees of freedom) A and B

@@dibeos I mean, I wasn't talking about the equation of an ellipse, I was talking about the elliptic curve X^3 + Y^3 = 1, if you don't see what I'm talking about it might be interesting to look it up, elliptic curves are kinda trendy nowadays… and proving Ferma's last theorem for n = 3 is asking whether there are any rational-coordinates points on the elliptic curve X^3 + Y^3 = 1.

@@m9l0m6nmelkior7 aaah ok, I see what you mean know! Yeah, probably we will make a video about it too.

@@dibeos That would be great !!

Thanks for the comment, Toby&endy!! 😎 I will add both of them to the list. Actually, about complex numbers I was already preparing one. Do you have any specific requirements inside of thermodynamics and complex numbers?

Thanks, Ajizul!!! Let us know what kind of videos you’d like to watch here

Yes, it’s true, Dylan. Did you try the challenge in the description? (Just out of curiosity) 😎

well a^n is not always a*a*a...n times. It's only true if n: |n| ≥ 1 . That is, it lies in the interval (-∞,-1]U[1,∞)

@@dibeos I have worked on the general proof for n dimensions and it seems rigorous enough to challenge the long held belief that it’s proven impossible.

Thanks again Riley!! It’s a pity that this video could not be “deeper”, but we are working on a video about a very cool subsection of number theory. It will be a little more technical, but I hope that it’s gonna be easy to understand for everyone anyway 😎

Oi Vinicius! Tudo bem se respondo em inglês? (Só porque o canal é em inglês…) I did a bachelors in physics at the University of São Paulo, Brazil, masters in mathematics at the University of Kiev, Ukraine, and (did not complete) my PhD in mathematics at the University of Udine, Italy.

@@dibeos oh, I read it wrong, but still amazing. I'm majoring in mathematics at USP, in ICMC. Great to see a fellow!

@@viniciuscilla2865 oh yeah!!! Let me know how I can help you (maybe making videos on things that would help you somehow)

@@dibeos Considering your background, why did you change from physics to math? Personally I was really in doubt about which area to follow when I was to decide, specially since I came from 2 years in electrical engineering. I ended up chosing math, but I think many people that love STEM in general have troubles to decide.

@@viniciuscilla2865 You know, the “unfortunate” thing is that there are too many interesting things to study in both math and physics, so it is impossible to really learn deeply any subject without sacrificing the other. I chose math because after having a strong background in physics I noticed that if I knew pure and applied math to a high enough level I would be able to learn pure math and theoretical physics. I’m very pleased with my decision, honestly. I think it’s easier to move from physics to math than the other way around. So I think you made the right decision as well haha

That’s awesome! You gave me the idea hahah now I want to make another one on Number Theory, but deeper (more technical)

​@@dibeos oh, it would be nice Bc in this video you took all the history from ancient Greeks to 18 century And maybe, I will mention that if Euclid not prove that quantity of prime numbers is infinitely many, maybe we would be not hunting for more and more ambitiously big prime numbers And I will be write in next comment some idea for the next deep video

@@SobTim-eu3xu do it please. I think prime numbers will always be interesting because they look so “innocent”, but actually there is a world of their own to explore

​@@dibeosyes, you right, if video would be full of prime numbers, it will be called cryptography is impossible without this 7 things, and this is not whole math(but algorithms can be looked by they formulas) But prime numbers, as you say is really a big world My idea is(not all can be in video) Prime numbers Riemann hypothesis Euler phi function(Fermar little theorem, Euler theorem) solving modular equations using phi function Kronecker/Jacobi/Legendre symbol I think that's it Do you have an email to send some ideas?

@@SobTim-eu3xu that’s awesome!!! I like this list so far. And yes, I do have an email: dibeos.contact@gmail.com

Dziękuję bardzo! Cieszę się, że Ci się podoba. Zapraszam do oglądania kolejnych filmów! Thank you very much! I'm glad you like it. Feel free to watch more of my videos! 😎

Hey Alex, thanks for the encouragement! I’m definitely open to publishing videos on any subjects related to math & physics, so feel free to comment what content you’d like to see. I personally do not have much knowledge on semi-rings, but I do know some Category Theory and I think that there are many interesting insights from the field. I guarantee you we’ll make a video on it soon. Let me study a little about semi-rings and add it to our list of ideas 😎

​@@dibeos Cathegory theory would be great 🥰

@@adamsmainchannel3789 thank you!! I’m convinced hahaha 😎 then, after you watch it, let us know if the video was deep enough, because it’s really hard to talk about everything having just one week to prepare it

Please do a deep dive on Category Theory ​@@dibeos

@@Mowrioh we will do it soon!! 😎

Why don’t you like it? Let us know how to improve the format

Yeah, the guy was good hahah 😎

Sorry about that, but I’m constantly working on improving my pronunciation 😎

@@dibeos Good to hear. ^_^

Very good question! The surprising fact is that a sphere can be turned inside out in a smooth way/transformation. This is interesting because many natural phenomena (in physics for example) are continuous and smooth. I do not know of any application for this mathematical fact, and I do not believe there is nowadays. However, almost all of mathematical results that are extremely useful in applied sciences now were first discovered as something useless, and only later their amazing applications were found. So, in a sense, I think we should continue looking for ghosts… they may very well turn out to be useful at some point 😬🫥 at least that’s what history has taught us so far 🤷🏻‍♂️

Really? Cause I always thought it was from RPF… ok then, thanks 😎🤙🏻

@@dibeos I always thought so too, I stumbled upon it being from Mermin a while ago 🙂

@@georgestav4043 I honestly didn’t know who Mermin was. I just looked it up. Shame on me 😶

Well, you are correct. Newton and Leibniz are the true “developers” of Calculus. What we meant is that Descartes gave very important contributions to Newton’s and Leibniz’s “toolbox” of mathematical tricks. In fact we have another video here in the channel where we talk about Newton and Leibniz and how they developed Calculus 😎

Thanks for the nice comment! I think knot theory is super interesting too!! We will make a video on it 😎🤙🏻

Also here’s the link to the image commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Trefoil_knot_conways_game_of_life_without_background_and_fitting.gif

Yes, it makes sense… but could the choice of a string rather than any other higher dimensional object be just the consequence of the choice of a “beautiful and simple” theory, in your opinion?

@@dibeos that's kind of my suspicion. String theory originated from a model of hadrons that was later replaced by the three charges of the strong force, so there's really no reason to not try and find other resonant structures that replicate the graviton.

Thank you!! 😎 We are glad you liked it

Why is it hard to watch? Let us know how to improve it please

Thank you so much for the nice comment, Gerardo! 😎🤙🏻

And we will be a that 1%, who the "old's"

@@SobTim-eu3xu thanks for the support, really! And let us know what kind of content you guys would like to watch 😉

@@dibeos just do what you do Its the greatest You its what you do, that some things, small details that differ you from everyone But, if some idea will be in my mind, I will immediately text her

@@SobTim-eu3xu thanks 😎🤙🏻

(Sidenote for layman's readers: Dilaton is for varying volume systems acrost the compactified multi-dimensional system. Whilst AdS/CFT for the parlor trick of dealing with Infinities in AdS via going to CFT, or alternatively dealing with infinities in CFT via going to AdS. The combo of these 2 pretty much guarantees any N-Brane systems usability *as long as you keep track of the important details ofc* ) (Additional Sidenote for those who are more technically inclined: D-Branes are just extremely P-Branes. Where's P-Branes are formed by such Dilatons. Hence the emergence of the Dirchelet Boundry condition using such methods)

Why do you say so?

Thanks Riley! Yeah, this photo looks very simple, but behind it there’s a long intellectual history that took us to this amazing discovery

Thanks for the nice comment, Princedhq!!! We are a married couple haha 😄

Thanks Pavan 😎🤙🏻

Oh really? What do you mean? How can I do it?

@@dibeos I'm working on my own video series, I'll post the first one here when it's done (week or so).

@@tedsheridan8725 that’s awesome! Please, do not forget! I love learning new insights on how to visualize higher dimensions

@@dibeos Basically the way we see, or display objects on a screen, is to project 3D onto a 2D plane (like our visual field). You can do the same thing with 4D by first projecting into 3D, and then into a 2D screen. The math isn't complicated but the results take time to learn how to interpret.

@@tedsheridan8725 that’s super cool