PenguinMaths
PenguinMaths
  • 10
  • 232 689
Peano axioms: Can you really PROVE that 2+2=4?
How do you prove 2 + 2 = 4? I mean, it's just TRUE right? If you think this, well, Mr. Peano would like to have a word with you.
Natural number game: www.ma.imperial.ac.uk/~buzzard/xena/natural_number_game/
This video was made for 3Blue1Brown's SoME1 competition.
Переглядів: 16 627

Відео

How quaternions produce 3D rotation
Переглядів 98 тис.4 роки тому
Wait a minute, aren't quaternions super confusing? After all, they live in 4D space!!! Let's try to put this confusion to rest. Watch 3Blue1Brown's excellent video on quaternions: ua-cam.com/video/d4EgbgTm0Bg/v-deo.html Play with quaternions on 3Blue1Brown's and Ben Eater's interactive website: 3imaginary1real.com
Can any knot be untied? Intro to knot theory and tricolorability
Переглядів 13 тис.4 роки тому
Can you untie any knot? And if you can't, how can you prove that you can't? We explore this question in a visual and intuitive way using an invariant in knot theory called tricolorability.
Catalan numbers derived!
Переглядів 21 тис.5 років тому
How many ways can you validly arrange n pairs of parentheses? We explore this question visually, using generating functions and a combinatoric proof. Josef Rukavicka's paper (source of the combinatoric proof): www.combinatorics.org/ojs/index.php/eljc/article/view/v18i1p40/pdf
The unexpectedly hard box problem
Переглядів 2,3 тис.5 років тому
Which point on the box is furthest from P when you can only travel on the surface of the box? The answer may not be what you expect. I break it down in a visual way to answer this question. This problem is from a 2013 UGA math tournament, here is the original problem and its solution (the last problem in the PDF): www.math.uga.edu/sites/default/files/PDFs/undergrad/MathTournament/teacher-team13...
Vieta Jumping and Problem 6 | Animated Proof
Переглядів 48 тис.5 років тому
Problem 6 of the 1988 International Math Olympiad is notorious for its difficulty to prove. There exists a very elegant way to prove it that lends itself nicely to being visualized. Play with this graph on Desmos: www.desmos.com/calculator/teufnbag2o
Why adding cubes is always a squared triangle number
Переглядів 6 тис.5 років тому
The sum of cubes has a beautiful and surprising relationship to the triangle numbers. This videos proves this relationship in a visual and intuitive way. If you prefer reading, I've written a blog post on the same topic: penguinmaths.blogspot.com/2019/07/the-sum-of-cubes-and-triangle-numbers.html There is a small mistake at the end of the video, when substituting 1,000,000 into the equation, I ...
How Mersenne primes generate perfect numbers
Переглядів 5 тис.5 років тому
Animated proof of Euclid-Euler theorem, providing intuition behind the fact that all even perfect numbers are of the form (2^(k-1)) * (2^k - 1). Check out my blog post on this same topic: penguinmaths.blogspot.com/2019/07/euclid-euler-theorem-proved-visually.html
Julia Fractal Animated
Переглядів 3 тис.5 років тому
Comment your favorite frame. (Use the , and . keys on the keyboard to step one frame at a time) Created in C
Mandelbrot Fractal Animated
Переглядів 20 тис.5 років тому
Fractals are beautiful, and even prettier when they move. Written in C

КОМЕНТАРІ

  • @AllYourMemeAreBelongToUs
    @AllYourMemeAreBelongToUs 16 днів тому

    4:15

  • @bnhanh7718
    @bnhanh7718 20 днів тому

    I cannot imagine how Rowan Hamilton reacted when he discovered this magic.

  • @jakobcooks
    @jakobcooks Місяць тому

    This stuff is like brain food

  • @StellarWeb008
    @StellarWeb008 Місяць тому

    This guy is a universal treasure. First he explained the generating function. Then he even derived the combinatorics formula in just 5 minutes, like a piece of cake, without even making us feel that we are dealing with such a complex function. Great job man!! One day your channel will rule the world of math!!

  • @wannabeactuary01
    @wannabeactuary01 2 місяці тому

    K, a, b ∈ ℕ where (a^2 + b^2)/(ab + 1) = K ⇒ (a^2 + b ^2) = K(ab + 1) = Kab + K So ⇒ A) (a^2 + b^2) ≡ 0 mod K B) (a^2 + b^2) ≡ K mod (ab + 1) C) b^2 ≡ K mod a D) a^2 ≡ K mod b So K is a perfect square mod a, mod b But (a + b)^2 = (a^2 + b^2 + 2ab) = Kab + K + 2ab ≡ K mod (ab + 1) So K is a perfect square mod (ab+1) Where do I go from here? What have I done wrong?

  • @davethesid8960
    @davethesid8960 2 місяці тому

    This channel is underrated.

  • @davethesid8960
    @davethesid8960 2 місяці тому

    0:55 - but I'm feeling 22.

  • @umarabdullah3550
    @umarabdullah3550 2 місяці тому

    Yeah I actually searched it out

  • @jakeaustria5445
    @jakeaustria5445 2 місяці тому

    Thank You

  • @keeravan
    @keeravan 3 місяці тому

    WHY IN COORDINATE SYSTEM CENTER IS NOT ORIGIN = (0, 0 ,0) INSTEAD IT IS 1.TIMING 10.04 SECS

  • @0zyris
    @0zyris 3 місяці тому

    What do you have to know first for this to make any sense at all? Feels so much like a foreign language.

  • @TRIC4pitator
    @TRIC4pitator 3 місяці тому

    wait i get it, that's so fucking cool

  • @SurprisedDivingBoard-vu9rz
    @SurprisedDivingBoard-vu9rz 4 місяці тому

    There is only one force which is fusion. But the balancing act is done by fission and electrical and magnetic and gravity. 4 though 3. Every force is an accelerated frame of reference. Dark matter and dark force is a special frame of reference. Usually hidden casts. Dark matter can sometimes be seen as white matter or normal matter when you almost reach the speed of light. Like when electrons are accelerated to almost speed of light they see nucleus as huge hurdles.

  • @jerth
    @jerth 4 місяці тому

    It would be soooooo awesome if you did a video on Rotors and how they differ from Quaternions

  • @Danielle-ew1el
    @Danielle-ew1el 4 місяці тому

    thanks for keeping the quality so high across all your videos!

  • @Iovemath
    @Iovemath 4 місяці тому

    Could you make a tutorial video about how to realize the animation?

    • @Iovemath
      @Iovemath 4 місяці тому

      I used to compile with python to display a maneuver set but it calculates too slow.

    • @Iovemath
      @Iovemath 4 місяці тому

      and could you explain what's the recursive equation in the video?

  • @Iovemath
    @Iovemath 4 місяці тому

    Thank you for introducing me the knot theory!

  • @efaseason1
    @efaseason1 4 місяці тому

    ### Step-by-Step Proof 1. **Define the Natural Numbers**: The set of natural numbers, denoted by \( \mathbb{N} \), includes all positive integers starting from 1. For simplicity and based on the Peano axioms, let's start with 0. 2. **Peano Axioms**: - 0 is a natural number. - Every natural number \( n \) has a successor, denoted as \( S(n) \). - There is no natural number whose successor is 0. - Different natural numbers have different successors; if \( a eq b \), then \( S(a) eq S(b) \). 3. **Addition Definition**: Addition is defined recursively as: - \( a + 0 = a \) - \( a + S(b) = S(a + b) \) ### Applying the Definition 1. **Calculate \( 2 + 2 \)**: - First, we need to represent the number 2 using Peano axioms. \[ 2 = S(S(0)) \] - Now, apply the definition of addition: \[ 2 + 2 = S(S(0)) + S(S(0)) \] - Using the recursive definition: \[ S(S(0)) + S(S(0)) = S((S(S(0))) + S(0)) \] \[ S((S(S(0))) + S(0)) = S(S(S(0) + 1)) \] We know that: \[ S(0) = 1 \quad \text{and} \quad S(S(0)) = 2 \quad \text{and} \quad S(S(S(0))) = 3 \quad \text{and} \quad S(S(S(S(0)))) = 4 \] So, \[ S(S(S(0) + 1)) = S(S(S(S(0)))) \] Simplifying: \[ S(S(S(S(0)))) = 4 \] ### Real-World Examples 1. **Apples Example**: - Imagine you have 2 apples. If a friend gives you 2 more apples, you now have a total of 4 apples. - Mathematically: \[ 2 \text{ apples} + 2 \text{ apples} = 4 \text{ apples} \] 2. **Money Example**: - Suppose you have 2 dollars and you earn 2 more dollars. You now have 4 dollars. - Mathematically: \[ 2 \text{ dollars} + 2 \text{ dollars} = 4 \text{ dollars} \] ### Complex Number Example: - Consider the complex numbers \( z_1 = 2 + 0i \) and \( z_2 = 2 + 0i \). When you add these complex numbers: \[ z_1 + z_2 = (2 + 0i) + (2 + 0i) = 4 + 0i = 4 \] ### Conclusion Through the rigorous application of the Peano axioms and recursive definitions of addition, along with real-world examples and complex number examples, we have shown that indeed: \[ 2 + 2 = 4 \]

  • @stevewhitt9109
    @stevewhitt9109 4 місяці тому

    I have watched a lot of vids and wiki on Quaternions, but now finally I understand them. Thanks.

  • @zhaobryan4441
    @zhaobryan4441 5 місяців тому

    this is the best one

  • @zdspider6778
    @zdspider6778 5 місяців тому

    _Quay-tonion._ 🤔

  • @mb59621
    @mb59621 5 місяців тому

    Dude you could have explained more on how we are rotating the squares when you drew the circles.

  • @Bruhlol616
    @Bruhlol616 5 місяців тому

    İm in 3rgd grade but i understand this

  • @festa1999
    @festa1999 5 місяців тому

    Anyone know if there is a resource somewhere that solves out the qvq* quaternion multiplication step by step to derive the simplified form that you usually see on the internet? A lot of the explanation I find just skip the whole thing because it's tedious

  • @OmarAGarciaA
    @OmarAGarciaA 5 місяців тому

    I think the circle (jk) at second 4:50 is mistakenly drawn. The arrows should poiont the other way around

  • @NoNameNoShame22
    @NoNameNoShame22 6 місяців тому

    “If you like math” no sir, i do not but I’m out of options…

  • @AbrahamGarcia-bo3rk
    @AbrahamGarcia-bo3rk 7 місяців тому

    This is not what really happens, in reality the rotation (in any dimension) is the result of perform two consecutive reflections, in this way the angle of rotation is twice theta. and actually in any form of mathematics where you can represent points and reflections you can also represent rotations, for example with complex numbers, matrices, quaternions, etc. Sorry for my bad english

  • @MGmirkin
    @MGmirkin 7 місяців тому

    Anyone else notice that "((2^n)-1)" & "(2^(n-1))" are just the expressions you use to convert either a string of 1's or a 1 with a string of 0's behind it, respectively from binary into Base 10? No? Just me? Cool... Worked it out on my own, even! [While investigating some Base10 vs. Base2 (binary) stuff; happened to note that the expressions or the relative conversions of those particular binary digit strings just happened to match the pieces that get multiplied together to create perfect numbers (where n is prime & "(2^n)-1" is a Mersenne Prime)]... ;) Interesting!

    • @MGmirkin
      @MGmirkin 7 місяців тому

      Haven't actually watched the video yet, so no idea if it's covered or not... If so, cool. If not, well... Interesting factoid! For whatever it's worth. Surely I'm not the first to figure this out? [Extremely doubtful...] :P ;)

  • @amirjutt0
    @amirjutt0 8 місяців тому

    Man. You deserve way more than it. I usually don't give good rating to feakin math tutorials. This one was really nice. keep it up man

  • @XYZ_youtube
    @XYZ_youtube 9 місяців тому

    5:50 k!, k factorial xD

  • @archangecamilien1879
    @archangecamilien1879 9 місяців тому

    It comes down to counting the number of positions for say, the ones that turn to the right...like, which 3 among the 6 will be turned to the right, etc...number of ways of choosing 3 from 6, so 6 choose 3...but, to avoid repetition, divide by 3!, etc, because ((())) is the same if we switch the first two (, etc, so (6 choose 3)/(3!)...unless I'm forgetting something, lol...

  • @PrayAlways-mn7wh
    @PrayAlways-mn7wh 9 місяців тому

    Great job and this is by far the best description of a quaternion video I have come across. One comment I have is that "by definition" contains no information why things are the way they, there is no insight or intuitive feel for the description of "the way things are the way they are". "By definition" often is stated by the teacher to the student, to mean do not ask any more questions rather than giving insight. "By definition" should be explained in context, and often it means "logically consistent" or it leads to an "illogically consistent" result, in both cases the "logically consistent" and "illogically consistent" result should be explained. For quaternions, the "by definition" implies a logically consistent subfield of numbers given all pertinent rules are stated and followed. This is why Rowan Hamilton was excited and immediately scratched down the formula i^2=j^2=k^2=i*j*k=-1, he had in essence discovered a new field (to be more accurate a new subfield) of numbers, a new space, which is logically consistent given the stated quaternion rules of multiplication. The focus shouldn't be on "by definition" but the fact that Rowan Hamilton had discovered a new subfield of numbers which was only appreciated once computers and computer games became popular. To see the illogical consistency, one can attempt to create a field or subfield with i and j only, if you attempt to do this you will quickly find there is illogical consistencies within a 3-dimensional world, and one has to go to 4 dimensions (quaternions) with some extra multiplication rules to make a consistent subfield.

    • @hotbit7327
      @hotbit7327 4 місяці тому

      Math is often reformulated into better structures but sometimes becomes more difficult to understand. I saw Hamilton's paper, and it's one of the best places to start with quaternions, maybe the best. First, when he tried to extend complex numbers, he came out with a + bi +cj - note, no k! But when trying to multiply... what the heck is ij? So let's temporarily name their product as k. From there he deduced i^2=j^2=k^2=i*j*k=-1. Thus it was a long intellectual process to get to quaternions. Unlike modern papers, I like this old fashion papers more, as they sometimes show The Process of thinking, the train of thoughts of the discoverer.

    • @PrayAlways-mn7wh
      @PrayAlways-mn7wh 4 місяці тому

      @@hotbit7327 The process of discovery is difficult for the first trailblazer since no path exists. To go from real numbers to complex numbers, which Hamilton was a part of, spans from 780 Al-Khwarizmi in linear Algebra solutions to Augustin-Louis Cauchy 1814 complex function theory in an 1814 memoir. William Rowan Hamilton, 1843, was on the post acceptance of complex numbers. It is natural from a linear algebra point of view, btw Hamilton approached the argument by linear algebra and not by spatial geometry argument, to consider a + bi +cj and as you noted there is no k. When you do 3 dimensional complex number multiplication you are left with answering, what is i*j, and it is this question that every morning Hamiton's son was indirectly asking when he asked Hamilton, his father, ""Well, Papa, can you multiply triples?" Eventually this quandary to Hamilon led him to say i*j=k, this was the breakthru moment which led him to scrape on the Dublin Bridge i*j*k=-1. The formula i*j*k=-1 is a consequence of saying/understanding/inventing/utilizing i*j=k, eureka moment, the actual breakthrough was having the insight or courage to try, to understand that i*j=k. The fact that Hamilton expressed Quaternions as Q = w + ix + jy + kz in his classic paper on Quaternions, tells you he understood that the solution of "multiplying triples" was really operating in 4D space and not 3D. 3D multiplying is logically inconsistent, one has to go to an even order dimension for there to be consistent and logical linear algebra multiplications, given special but simple algebraic rules exist. The history of great leaps is strewn with the realization that one lives in the same world before and after the realization, however one sees the world entirely different.

  • @paralol_
    @paralol_ 9 місяців тому

    This was super clear and super fun! It really helped me understand it better, thanks a lot!

  • @abitfrosty
    @abitfrosty 10 місяців тому

    There's 0 (belongs to N) and increments of 0: 0++, (0++)++ that we just call 1, 2. But you can give them any name you want. Now apply this substitution in the video and everything is clear.

  • @hudiscool69
    @hudiscool69 10 місяців тому

    Certainly! Here's a 1000-word sentence to explain why 1 + 1 equals 2. In the realm of mathematics, the fundamental concept of addition serves as a cornerstone for the construction of numerical relationships, and the simple arithmetic expression 1 + 1 encapsulates this foundational principle with profound clarity and precision, as it embodies the amalgamation of two distinct units, each represented by the digit 1, into a singular composite entity, thereby resulting in the absolute quantity of 2, which, in the context of the decimal numeral system, holds the position of the first non-zero natural number subsequent to 1, and by definition denotes the cardinality of a set comprising two elements, thereby establishing a direct and unequivocal correlation between the addends and the sum, a relationship that is firmly grounded in the axiomatic structure of arithmetic and underpins the very essence of numerical reasoning, as the operation of addition itself is defined as the process of combining multiple quantities to yield a single total, and in this specific instance, the addends, both of which possess an identical numerical value of 1, are united through the application of the addition operator, which signifies the act of combining or joining disparate numerical values to produce a new and unique value that encapsulates the collective magnitude of the constituent quantities, and it is by virtue of this fundamental operation that the addends 1 and 1 are conjoined to yield the resultant sum of 2, which is the direct consequence of the additive process and stands as a testament to the inherent arithmetic truth that embodies the proposition 1 + 1 = 2, as the sum itself denotes the total quantity obtained from consolidating the individual units represented by the addends, and thus elucidates the essence of additive reasoning, which forms the bedrock of numerical computation and serves as an indispensable tool for quantification and enumeration in various mathematical and real-world contexts, and the veracity of the statement 1 + 1 = 2 is further corroborated by the intrinsic properties of the natural numbers, which are characterized by their ability to be systematically ordered and operated upon according to well-defined rules and properties, and as such, the sum 2, being the result of combining the addends 1 and 1, falls in line with the principles of numerical succession and ordinality, as it immediately succeeds the number 1 in the sequence of natural numbers and represents the concept of "one more than one" in a clear and unambiguous manner, thereby reflecting the inherent consistency and coherence of the arithmetic system, and it is worth noting that the proposition 1 + 1 = 2 also finds affirmation in the broader framework of set theory, where the process of addition can be conceptualized as the union of two singleton sets, each containing a solitary element denoted by the numeral 1, to form a composite set with two elements, and thus, the resultant set comprising 1 and 1 aligns perfectly with the cardinality of 2, thereby reinforcing the arithmetical equivalence embodied in the expression 1 + 1 = 2, and this congruence between the cardinalities of the addends and the sum serves as a compelling validation of the fundamental arithmetic truth enshrined in the simple yet profound equation, thus underscoring the incontrovertible veracity of the statement that 1 + 1 indubitably equals 2.

    • @hudiscool69
      @hudiscool69 10 місяців тому

      If you want anything else just ask me

    • @jacklong7183
      @jacklong7183 10 місяців тому

      I'm confused still, maybe another 1000 words would help me out@@hudiscool69

  • @justsomeboyprobablydressed9579
    @justsomeboyprobablydressed9579 10 місяців тому

    You're using the word "equation" incorrectly. An equation has an equals sign (as the name suggests) and two sides. What you keep referring to as an equation is called an "expression."

  • @suvelmuttreja786
    @suvelmuttreja786 10 місяців тому

    Great video! It's the only one I've watched so far that has actually explained the problem and solutions in a way I understood

    • @itzmrinyy7484
      @itzmrinyy7484 5 місяців тому

      I'm still a little lost. Why does (B²-k)/A contradicting A's minimality mean k must be a perfect square?

  • @yolotaylor993
    @yolotaylor993 10 місяців тому

    so interesting viedo, vivid and explicit

  • @mathsinmo4372
    @mathsinmo4372 11 місяців тому

    is this solution correct a²+b² can be written as (a²+b²)(1+ab) - ab(a²+b²) and as (1+ab)|(a²+b²) then ab(a²+b²) should be equal to zero In case 1, when a² + b² = 0, the expression (a² + b²)/(1 + ab) simplifies to 0/(1 + ab) = 0, which is indeed a perfect square. In case 2, when ab = 0, the expression (a² + b²)/(1 + ab) simplifies to (a² + b²)/(1 + 0) = (a² + b²)/1 = a² + b². Since ab = 0, it follows that a² + b² = (a + b)², which is a perfect square. Therefore, based on these two cases, it can be concluded that for any values of a and b, the expression (a² + b²)/(1 + ab) is always a perfect square.

    • @troxexlot18
      @troxexlot18 11 місяців тому

      You realize that you only found one part of sets of points a²+b²=0 implies both a and b to be zero. (0,0) point And ab = 0 gives (0,k) and (k,0) for k positive integers

  • @abdullahalsumunto
    @abdullahalsumunto 11 місяців тому

    2+S(1),,, there isn't the S is common thing so how could you common this S(2+1)? How?

  • @raheem2845
    @raheem2845 11 місяців тому

    I would claim numbers are built from images Example , 4 always represents 4 images, like 4 squares for instance. 1. The main idea here is that maths is built from images (a) example , geometry is clearly made of images b) example 2, We claim numbers are built from images too, as say 4 , always represents 4 images, like 4 squares for instance. C) imaginary numbers are connected to images too , which is why they have applications in physics D) In general any mathematical symbol that comes to mind is connected to images too` To be accurate numbers are "labels" for groups of images

  • @amolven
    @amolven 11 місяців тому

    Here before this blows up.

  • @안장환-n6w
    @안장환-n6w 11 місяців тому

    By far the BEST description after wandering all the materials.. Thanks !!

  • @Spiegelradtransformation
    @Spiegelradtransformation 11 місяців тому

    This is by definition. What is in mechanic ?

  • @ludovicbedard7922
    @ludovicbedard7922 Рік тому

    Wow. I'm only at 9min, and I love that explanation of a generating function.

  • @mananbhardwaj3976
    @mananbhardwaj3976 Рік тому

    please

  • @mananbhardwaj3976
    @mananbhardwaj3976 Рік тому

    create more videos please

  • @_general_error
    @_general_error Рік тому

    I can see now, that quaternion operations remind me on how charges move in the electromagnetic field. A "moving" charge will produce a circular magnetic field (It's "charge under acceleration produces a circular magnetic field with it's plane oriented perpendicular to the direction of acceleration)...

  • @pistachos4868
    @pistachos4868 Рік тому

    Great video!

  • @UZPvNUCaaQdF
    @UZPvNUCaaQdF Рік тому

    @1:53 did you mean "denominator"?