Zero Factorial - Numberphile

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 18 тра 2024
  • 0! = 1
    Dr James Grime tries to explain why this is the case - follow James on Twitter at / jamesgrime
    More links & stuff in full description below ↓↓↓
    Regarding the equation at the end - James says it should be e^-t dt NOT e^-n dn ... sorry for the mix-up!
    NUMBERPHILE
    Website: www.numberphile.com/
    Numberphile on Facebook: / numberphile
    Numberphile tweets: / numberphile
    Subscribe: bit.ly/Numberphile_Sub
    Videos by Brady Haran
    Patreon: / numberphile
    Brady's videos subreddit: / bradyharan
    Brady's latest videos across all channels: www.bradyharanblog.com/
    Sign up for (occasional) emails: eepurl.com/YdjL9
    Numberphile T-Shirts: teespring.com/stores/numberphile
    Other merchandise: store.dftba.com/collections/n...
  • Наука та технологія

КОМЕНТАРІ • 9 тис.

  • @B3Band
    @B3Band 7 років тому +4724

    If you shout 0 loudly enough, it becomes 1.
    *0!*

  • @sarahboes6829
    @sarahboes6829 8 років тому +2175

    "There's zero objects..." *Zooms in on blank paper*

  • @Purendrakingoytb
    @Purendrakingoytb 2 роки тому +1757

    Computer Engineers looking at the thumbnail - "Ah! yes. That's true."

    • @PianOG
      @PianOG 2 роки тому +13

      😂😂😂

    • @madladdie7069
      @madladdie7069 2 роки тому +28

      Lol, I got that joke mainly due to messing around with Minecraft commands.

    • @legendaryhacker9910
      @legendaryhacker9910 2 роки тому +165

      For the peoples who are dont understand the joke: != means in programming lang. "Not equal" so 0 is not equal to 1

    • @aseanidmiller1238
      @aseanidmiller1238 2 роки тому +3

      😭😂😂😂

    • @lukasbeyer2649
      @lukasbeyer2649 2 роки тому +2

      yep yep

  • @chunchun8241
    @chunchun8241 4 роки тому +2711

    I asked my math teacher why 0!=1 he said "because it's like that"

  • @jaykay4137
    @jaykay4137 8 років тому +7740

    "You've broken maths, Brady. Stop that."
    This is why I now love math.

    • @andrewbell23
      @andrewbell23 7 років тому +140

      Yeah I cracked up at that part! Lol

    • @HayTatsuko
      @HayTatsuko 7 років тому +51

      I love the little smirk Dr. Grime gives just before showing the example!

    • @sliceofgarlicbread6868
      @sliceofgarlicbread6868 7 років тому +23

      +Jay Kay I checked the comments to see if anyone said that.

    • @actuallyasriel
      @actuallyasriel 7 років тому +38

      I love this guy so much. James is my favourite.

    • @sliceofgarlicbread6868
      @sliceofgarlicbread6868 7 років тому +18

      Asriel Dreemurr My favorite is Matt Parker. Except, all the people on Numberphile are great!

  • @jackarundajiralhasari1062
    @jackarundajiralhasari1062 6 років тому +4178

    Aw, I was really wanting to see him try to arrange -1 coins.

    • @matchstickgameplay
      @matchstickgameplay 5 років тому +437

      That's 1920s German money

    • @Ph0n3numb3r
      @Ph0n3numb3r 5 років тому +141

      Money made out of anti matter.

    • @berwynsigns4115
      @berwynsigns4115 5 років тому +201

      There are 1/0 ways to arrange -1 objects.

    • @thomashan4963
      @thomashan4963 5 років тому +107

      Acutally, I've been arranging -n dollars every week.

    • @Xnoob545
      @Xnoob545 5 років тому +25

      I...I...uhm...
      **dies**

  • @cydar
    @cydar 4 роки тому +2846

    4:21 when my teacher asks where my homework is

  • @oldveins
    @oldveins 4 роки тому +613

    The moment starting at 4:14 looks like it was taken straight out of some kind of math version of The Office.

    • @gobucbabu1583
      @gobucbabu1583 4 роки тому +12

      I thought the exact same thing 😂.

    • @dicktsui1818
      @dicktsui1818 4 роки тому +5

      I can't see it but don't do anything rash and stay healthy.

    • @blow-by-blow12
      @blow-by-blow12 3 роки тому +1

      Omg you are spot on! Never struck me the first time but now it's even funnier.

    • @Peter_1986
      @Peter_1986 3 роки тому +7

      I couldn't see that.
      But maybe that is because I have never watched "The Office".

    • @LSC69
      @LSC69 2 роки тому +1

      I like your profile name

  • @sanokk3439
    @sanokk3439 5 років тому +2507

    "there it is, wanna see me do it again? there it is!" xD
    that made my day

    • @corpsiecorpsie_the_original
      @corpsiecorpsie_the_original 4 роки тому +30

      I like how his extra British accent came out during that 😄

    • @JassonCordones
      @JassonCordones 4 роки тому +4

      @Lester Meza That's the reference

    • @EnerJetix
      @EnerJetix 4 роки тому

      Same :)

    • @EnerJetix
      @EnerJetix 4 роки тому +2

      griffin tucker no there’s only one.

    • @hardnrg8000
      @hardnrg8000 4 роки тому +3

      @griffin tucker you don't get it. There is only one way to arrange it. By having it empty.

  • @TheLycanDragon
    @TheLycanDragon 8 років тому +2210

    We need t-shirts saying "You've broken maths brady!"

  • @hugodesrosiers-plaisance3156
    @hugodesrosiers-plaisance3156 2 роки тому +395

    When he says "there's zero objects" and the camera zooms in on the blank paper, it really shows the capacity for the human mind to conceptualize things which aren't material. I love this.

    • @paulsingh1165
      @paulsingh1165 Рік тому +18

      I laughed so hard when he was like "here watch me do it again"! 🤣

  • @commenturthegreat2915
    @commenturthegreat2915 4 роки тому +519

    Programmers: "Well yeah obviously 0 isn't equal to 1..."

    • @kiroo886
      @kiroo886 4 роки тому +24

      "quantum computer say hello"

    • @joelschama1735
      @joelschama1735 4 роки тому +32

      Code monkeys: 0≠1, but 0!=1.

    • @leetfukk
      @leetfukk 4 роки тому +39

      @@joelschama1735 In a lot of common programming languages, != means "does not equal"

    • @joelschama1735
      @joelschama1735 4 роки тому +6

      @@leetfukk It also means factorial. And 0!=1.
      I've done a lot of programming, and ! checks to see if two operands are equal or not as in "(A!=B) true" and if they are not equal the function runs.
      My only point was that as a codemonkey in binary 0≠1, yet in pure mathematics 0!=1.

    • @Missiletainn
      @Missiletainn 4 роки тому +4

      Well, most programming languages count from 0, so the 1st object in a list is 0

  • @uuu12343
    @uuu12343 7 років тому +675

    "See who says mathematicians don't make a lot of money, there's literally 50p here"
    Your sense of humour satisfies me

    • @ethangoldsmith9332
      @ethangoldsmith9332 6 років тому +1

      What is 'p'? is it pound?

    • @kedymera6164
      @kedymera6164 6 років тому +18

      no, it's "pence" (one pence = 1p = £0.01)

    • @ninajoyce9906
      @ninajoyce9906 6 років тому +1

      Ethan Goldsmith you uncultured swine!! -(joke)

    • @SpyridonJohn1633
      @SpyridonJohn1633 5 років тому +18

      Eternia Dr. James has an awesome sense of humour. "How many way of arranging 0 objects. There it is. Wanna see me do it again? There it is!"

    • @RMate-bu7se
      @RMate-bu7se 5 років тому +1

      @@SpyridonJohn1633 that me made smile :)

  • @laurel8831
    @laurel8831 9 років тому +3781

    I wish he was my math teacher ..

    • @numberphile
      @numberphile  9 років тому +476

      Joshua Rage well today he was!

    • @laurel8831
      @laurel8831 9 років тому +109

      Numberphile I'm sure this wasn't the last time! :)

    • @Zenovarse
      @Zenovarse 9 років тому +5

      -1!=?

    • @SteveMcRae
      @SteveMcRae 9 років тому +15

      Zenovarse -1!= -1Remember, you always do factorials first then apply the unary operator for the negation.

    • @thatoneguy9582
      @thatoneguy9582 9 років тому +4

      Zenovarse -1!=-1 because -5!=-120 since -5 times -4 times -3 times -2 times -1=-120. You would think -5 times -4 times -3 times -2=-120 but it equals 120 since -1 in multiplication makes the answer negative.

  • @mpekim
    @mpekim 4 роки тому +182

    4:24 you wanna see me arrange these objects?
    You wanna see me do it again?

  • @ArcanusEst
    @ArcanusEst 4 роки тому +174

    ME (NOT A MATHEMATICIAN): "But I don't get it, how do you arrange nothing?"
    JAMES: "Would you like to see it?"
    ME: "Yes."
    JAMES: "There it is."
    ME: "...oh."
    JAMES: "Would you like to see it again?"
    ME: "...maybe."
    JAMES: "There it is."
    ME: "...okay."

    • @louisrobitaille5810
      @louisrobitaille5810 Рік тому +4

      "How do you arrange nothing" in maths is the same thing as asking "How many different ways can you arrange 0 objects?" The answer is then simple to see. There's only one way to arrange 0 objects, i.e. the one you're looking at: no arrangement. Therefore, you can arrange 0 objects 1 way.

  • @MisterBones2910
    @MisterBones2910 8 років тому +292

    I liked the cheeky little zoom to get a more detailed shot of the nothing.

  • @yoloswaggins2161
    @yoloswaggins2161 5 років тому +2922

    I hate it when people flex their overflowing wealth like that.

    • @DoneWN
      @DoneWN 4 роки тому +50

      @Lo Po I think you missed the joke my friend

    • @lindakan9809
      @lindakan9809 4 роки тому +28

      @Lo Po r/woosh

    • @wellshit9489
      @wellshit9489 4 роки тому +8

      @Lo Po james ain't rich I'm guessing

    • @manw3bttcks
      @manw3bttcks 4 роки тому +9

      I was more upset with the idea of coins in a wallet, do many people do that?

    • @earthtoashlyn
      @earthtoashlyn 4 роки тому +22

      manw3bttcks where else would you put them

  • @Azulmine
    @Azulmine 4 роки тому +192

    “We have zero objects”
    *zooms in on blank paper*

  • @zmanitee1664
    @zmanitee1664 4 роки тому +189

    Mathematicians: Does 0 !=1?
    Programmers: Well yes, but actually yes

    • @JonathanMandrake
      @JonathanMandrake 3 роки тому +26

      Well, the only thing in the factorials programmers have a problem with:
      1!=1

    • @oenrn
      @oenrn 3 роки тому +12

      @@JonathanMandrake 2!=2

    • @geryz7549
      @geryz7549 3 роки тому +5

      and that's why you use spaces...

    • @LSC69
      @LSC69 2 роки тому +1

      @@geryz7549 programming languages that use white space are considered bad

    • @MrAlRats
      @MrAlRats 2 роки тому +5

      The very first programming language that I was introduced to in school used the symbols "" for "not equal to", which makes more sense because it means "greater than or less than". It's unfortunate that not all languages use "".

  • @hlynurgumundsson6979
    @hlynurgumundsson6979 7 років тому +298

    2:56 'You've broken maths Brady, STOP THAT!!!'

  • @davidgalindez4856
    @davidgalindez4856 8 років тому +1361

    "there it is, wanna see me do it again? there it is!" xD

    • @daviddlamini4290
      @daviddlamini4290 8 років тому +8

      +Dave Galindez hahahaa that killed m

    • @maccyio1327
      @maccyio1327 8 років тому +2

      Damn AHAHAHAHAEHEAHEHEAHEIHIHIHEHIEHII

    • @Alishah189
      @Alishah189 8 років тому +2

      haha, made my day

    • @MegaMGstudios
      @MegaMGstudios 7 років тому +15

      read this at the exact moment he said it, and its my first time watching this vid

    • @ShakilHashmi
      @ShakilHashmi 6 років тому

      Loved that actually...

  • @debajyotidas655
    @debajyotidas655 4 роки тому +486

    In 6:04 min the Gamma function had a little bit of mistake. The gamma function is written as:
    Gamma fn(n)= Integral of t^(n-1)*exp(-t) dt
    NOT
    Gamma fn(n)= Integral of t^(n-1)*exp(-n) dn

    • @sunandinighosh6037
      @sunandinighosh6037 3 роки тому +33

      I was looking for this cause n is a number where as t was the variable...thanx

    • @williamcoles5149
      @williamcoles5149 3 роки тому +16

      @@sunandinighosh6037 i was thinking "how can you differentiate with respect to a constant?" I am learning calc and thought i missed something

    • @shoutitallloud
      @shoutitallloud 3 роки тому +3

      I don't uderstand quite what is "t" here. Could you explain please?

    • @derenglander7995
      @derenglander7995 3 роки тому +14

      @@shoutitallloud t is just a variable here, without deeper meaning behind it. It can take values between 0 and infinity. The function is then integrated over t, and the solution of that happens to be (n-1)! It's quite interesting, and you can show that this relation is true, but that requires knowledge of integration, and is quite complicated.

    • @williamcoles5149
      @williamcoles5149 3 роки тому +1

      @@shoutitallloud the variable of integration

  • @andrewkoper9170
    @andrewkoper9170 Рік тому +32

    I really like the way you arranged the zero objects. You are a true artist.

  • @ariadumler410
    @ariadumler410 5 років тому +1312

    I love Dr. Grimes he has such an enthusiasm to him that i absolutely adore

    • @CONGTHEGUERILLA
      @CONGTHEGUERILLA 3 роки тому +48

      Fr hes not even tryin to teach hes just having a blast

    • @-enzyme
      @-enzyme 3 роки тому +10

      Big facks

    • @jlew92xx
      @jlew92xx 3 роки тому +10

      Love him too

    • @tionier9312
      @tionier9312 3 роки тому +1

      @@-enzyme
      Bbbb
      Bbfff

    • @yvaskhmir
      @yvaskhmir 3 роки тому +4

      Isn't it like a common thing on this channel?

  • @CarstenSvendsen
    @CarstenSvendsen 7 років тому +446

    The zoom in on "nothing" just made my day

  • @gulshantiwari722
    @gulshantiwari722 4 роки тому +54

    This is the most satisfying explanation I have come across about the zero factorial. On top of the technical, division proof, you made it very easy to understand in practical terms.

  • @Antho9
    @Antho9 4 роки тому +13

    3:59 I love the dramatic zoom in

  • @crazygamelover1651
    @crazygamelover1651 6 років тому +270

    "Hi, -1 factorial?"
    "Sorry, mathematics broke"
    "Understandable, have a nice day"

  • @diabolicallink
    @diabolicallink 8 років тому +2378

    You've broken maths Brady stop that

    • @mindspunk
      @mindspunk 8 років тому +153

      thats the funniest thing I've ever heard on this channel

    • @Julio7514
      @Julio7514 8 років тому +37

      that was amazing

    • @erics.451
      @erics.451 8 років тому +5

      +diabolicallink Ikr I told my dad that

    • @davidjoffe-hunter7016
      @davidjoffe-hunter7016 8 років тому +15

      That was the best

    • @jarto10
      @jarto10 8 років тому +40

      +diabolicallink I went to the comments just after hearing that sentence convinced that it had not gone unnoticed, and I wasn't dissapointed!

  • @JuniorBloxHD
    @JuniorBloxHD 4 роки тому +392

    Me seeing the thumbnail as a programmer:
    *hmm yes the floor is made out of floor*

    • @jhon5916
      @jhon5916 4 роки тому +2

      Junior roblox

    • @enzoqueijao
      @enzoqueijao 4 роки тому +2

      I'm not a programmer what do you mean

    • @linobigatti
      @linobigatti 4 роки тому +71

      != is the difference operator
      0 != 1 means "zero is different from one"

    • @ontley
      @ontley 4 роки тому +1

      @@KieranHelix heh? What

    • @zoklev
      @zoklev 3 роки тому +15

      more like: _the floor isn't made out of doors_

  • @MattMcIrvin
    @MattMcIrvin 3 роки тому +12

    The way I would say it is: when presented with these situations that sort of break the assumptions of a naive formula (like raising something to the power of zero, or finding zero factorial, or figuring whether or not 1 is prime), it's convenient for mathematicians to just decide on a consistent *convention*. They can leave the answer undefined, or they can assign a value, and what generally happens is that the value is assigned in such a way as to make general calculations easier, without having to add some extra specifications about special cases all the time.
    In this case, saying 0! = 1 is the least awkward choice for general formulae. It means that n! = n *(n-1)! is true even for n=1. It means that you can write the Taylor series expansion for a function using factorials in a consistent way, without having a special case for n=0. And there are a lot of other areas where this is the most convenient choice.

    • @Kpac_
      @Kpac_ 2 роки тому

      I appreciate this explanation more than the one in the video. Thank you.

  • @tacchinotacchi
    @tacchinotacchi 9 років тому +249

    The cover of this video says "0!=1"
    In computer programming "!=" is a logic operator that returns true when the two numbers are different.
    In simplier words, it means "is different from".
    I read "0 != 1" and said "No shit"

    • @churchmanner
      @churchmanner 9 років тому +25

      Find 'N' Frag LOL...so you read it as "zero is not equal to one" that's hilarious

    • @AnkaaAvarshina
      @AnkaaAvarshina 9 років тому +56

      Programmer jokes. I love you.

    • @rich1051414
      @rich1051414 9 років тому +1

      Sapphire Shard Was it a joke? I am a programmer too, and I did the same thing. More of an observation really :P

    • @salmjak
      @salmjak 9 років тому +1

      Actually != is written as a = With a dash in it (on paper).
      I program a lot as a hobby and I still understood what the title ment. Basically because "!=" is only ever used in programming and not in writing.

    • @rich1051414
      @rich1051414 9 років тому

      salmjak "As a hobby". If you did it for a living, you would be reading more code, than nearly anything else :P

  • @HyperSpify
    @HyperSpify 10 років тому +103

    All of us programmers read "0!=1" as: zero is not equal to one, which also happens to be true.

  • @muradalichanna7597
    @muradalichanna7597 2 роки тому +7

    So contagious and engaging the way he carries his argument. ❤️

  • @harmenbreedeveld8026
    @harmenbreedeveld8026 3 роки тому +8

    My lightbulb really went on when you said that n factorial represents the number of ways you can organize n objects. Because I was just wondering about applications for n factorial. Thanks for that remark!

  • @anuj8825
    @anuj8825 5 років тому +717

    2:55
    *math.exe has stopped working*

  • @JohnOh0701
    @JohnOh0701 10 років тому +141

    I hate when math breaks

  • @noobmaster31
    @noobmaster31 4 роки тому +13

    Love this channel! Opens up my mind to new mathematical ideas and refreshes me on ones I already knew.

  • @chrisrobertson1443
    @chrisrobertson1443 11 місяців тому +4

    i could watch videos of James all day, whether i understand what he's talking about or not his enthusiasm is so infectious he makes everything interesting

  • @GregTom2
    @GregTom2 9 років тому +208

    I was sort of expecting the paper to burst into flames when they tried (-1)!

    • @Woodside235
      @Woodside235 9 років тому +15

      Technically you can do negative factorials. It's undefined at negative integers, though.

    • @Woodside235
      @Woodside235 9 років тому

      *****
      The factorial function can be extended to be Γ(x+1), so.

    • @Sylocat
      @Sylocat 9 років тому +19

      Well, I just typed "This sentence is false" and my keyboard didn't explode, so...

    • @manmanman784
      @manmanman784 9 років тому +1

      dt!

    • @robertojarrin3634
      @robertojarrin3634 9 років тому +6

      0!/0=-1!
      0!=1
      1/0=-1!
      -1! is undefined

  • @michaelwinter742
    @michaelwinter742 7 років тому +744

    He doesn't do drugs. He does maths. It gets him so high he can graph an exponential function in Cartesian coordinates.

    • @rewrose2838
      @rewrose2838 7 років тому +2

      ?

    • @michaelwinter742
      @michaelwinter742 7 років тому +23

      Rew Rose Exponential growth quickly does not fit on a Cartesian coordinate system. We use logarithmic graphing for exponential growth curves.

    • @rewrose2838
      @rewrose2838 7 років тому +2

      Michael Winter
      ok . . . ( why though? )

    • @oivanhoi2249
      @oivanhoi2249 7 років тому

      Michael Winter

    • @michaelwinter742
      @michaelwinter742 7 років тому +14

      Rew Rose there is only a small usable range of exponential growth in Cartesian space. Here is an example of exponential growth:
      2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512,1024,2048
      What do you think is the best range to understand and use that data?

  • @_t03r
    @_t03r 4 роки тому +51

    6:04 No one noticed, that it should be the integral of t^(n-1) e^(-t) dt instead?

    • @chaktr466
      @chaktr466 4 роки тому +5

      I was going through the comments to check that too

    • @colinn4239
      @colinn4239 4 роки тому +2

      yeah really bothers me

    • @mikeyn7778
      @mikeyn7778 3 роки тому +2

      It was a human error

    • @Nimanames
      @Nimanames 3 роки тому +1

      THANK YOU! I had to scroll down A LOT to find your comment, it was driving me crazy!

    • @mariafe7050
      @mariafe7050 2 роки тому

      He said that in the description.

  • @naiale6974
    @naiale6974 2 роки тому +2

    2:23 I love how you can see the “oh shit” in his eyes when he knows he can’t answer the question

  • @serendipity9defined
    @serendipity9defined 10 років тому +147

    You've broken math Brady! Stop that.

  • @HeroRaze
    @HeroRaze 8 років тому +441

    I read the thumbnail as "zero is not equal to one". lol

    • @Lucifer00011
      @Lucifer00011 8 років тому +3

      the struggles R real!

    • @Lucifer00011
      @Lucifer00011 8 років тому

      the struggles R real!

    • @pkermen
      @pkermen 8 років тому +61

      +Ryan G-P
      return true;

    • @jursamaj
      @jursamaj 8 років тому +5

      +JusesCrustes Unless the struggles are integer or complex. :)

    • @ikasu00
      @ikasu00 8 років тому +11

      >>>print 0!=1
      True

  • @nickparry4997
    @nickparry4997 4 роки тому +177

    Has a huge blackboard
    Wastes sharpie and cardboard

  • @edgargonzalesbutron9844
    @edgargonzalesbutron9844 3 роки тому +2

    Brilliant and concise explanations for O! and the so useful Gamma function. Thanks a lot Dr James!!

  • @cluckendip
    @cluckendip 5 років тому +217

    "You've broken maths, stop it"
    I love this channel

  • @odycmboden3580
    @odycmboden3580 8 років тому +329

    "youve broken math! stop that"

    • @szymongorczynski7621
      @szymongorczynski7621 8 років тому +17

      Maths***

    • @remavas5470
      @remavas5470 8 років тому +1

      +Szymon Gorczynski It's an UK and US thing: US uses math and UK uses maths

    • @szymongorczynski7621
      @szymongorczynski7621 8 років тому +7

      Remavas Yes, I know the Americans can't spell.

    • @flawlessgenius
      @flawlessgenius 7 років тому

      +Szymon Gorczynski h!=hs
      thats why 'stop that' wasnt exclaimed

    • @szymongorczynski7621
      @szymongorczynski7621 7 років тому

      flawlessgenius And where did I question that?

  • @loganisanerd5566
    @loganisanerd5566 3 роки тому +5

    I love this channel, and 2:54 is such a perfect moment to encapsulate the whole thing.

  • @jonathantoothbreaker8786
    @jonathantoothbreaker8786 2 роки тому +1

    when he says “wanna see me do it again, there it is” gesturing to the empty piece of paper, my day was made

  • @MarineNinja
    @MarineNinja 8 років тому +118

    philosophically i think there are infinite ways to order 0 objects.

    • @EmperorZelos
      @EmperorZelos 8 років тому +99

      +sharon f Okey, present 2 different ways.

    • @victorfeltes
      @victorfeltes 8 років тому +30

      +sharon f
      Or alternatively, there are zero ways to order 0 objects.

    • @EmperorZelos
      @EmperorZelos 8 років тому +22

      Fr. Victor Feltes But there is at least one way, namelyin no order.

    • @victorfeltes
      @victorfeltes 8 років тому +9

      ***** It's like asking the question, "How many times can you divide by zero?" I could see the answer being 0, 1, or ∞ but, as it is, the answer remains "undefined."

    • @EmperorZelos
      @EmperorZelos 8 років тому +11

      Except that question is malformed as it assumes an inverse of 0 exists which it doesn't

  • @videoswithmax7188
    @videoswithmax7188 6 років тому +153

    2:53 is the funniest part of any video I've seen

  • @aryanagrawal9103
    @aryanagrawal9103 4 роки тому +65

    Everything was going fine.
    Then came 5:38

    • @leocharpentier4412
      @leocharpentier4412 4 роки тому

      Really yuh

    • @blow-by-blow12
      @blow-by-blow12 3 роки тому

      Exactly my experience. I was feeling quite smug up to that point.

    • @VandroiyIII
      @VandroiyIII 3 роки тому +1

      Yea lol, but they fixed it, see "show more"
      t isn't even defined, nor is he integrating over it. Bit of a derp there. Replace t with n and... EDIT: WAIT, no. This still makes no sense lol. Just look up the actual gamma function haha.

  • @wezpa
    @wezpa 2 роки тому +1

    The camera work during the arranging of one coin is amazing. Loving the zoom - made me laugh.

  • @pedroheck3667
    @pedroheck3667 7 років тому +741

    2:56 I don't know why but I laughed so hard

  • @Arkalius80
    @Arkalius80 9 років тому +94

    For all the people unsatisfied with the explanations offered by the video, how about we just rely on the base definition of the factorial? The factorial of a non-negative integer n (n!) is defined as the product of all positive integers less than or equal to n. There are no positive integers less than or equal to 0, so 0! is the empty product, or the product of no numbers. The empty product is defined to be the multiplicative identity, which is 1. (Just like the empty sum is the additive identity, which is 0).

    • @KarstenOkk
      @KarstenOkk 9 років тому

      I wasn't satisfied with the "complete the pattern"-explanation but the coin method makes sense, since that's what factorial is really meant for.

    • @aunibbww
      @aunibbww 9 років тому

      Pravat Kiran Timsina or psychological minors? xD

    • @Acsabi44
      @Acsabi44 9 років тому

      or we could rely on another definition of factorial, which is n!=(something)*n. You multiply all the numbers less than, and equal to, n.
      Now following this logic, 0! = (something)*0. Anything multiplied by 0 is 0 so 0!=0.

    • @ivo
      @ivo 9 років тому

      Arkalius80 0 is where the graphs start. Its not on either side of the graphs, its not negative, but its also not positive SO you can't have 0! as 0 is not "non-negative" the same way he decided to stop completing the pattern at -1 since it's wrong. Its equally wrong to do it with 0 !!!!

    • @sempaid12345
      @sempaid12345 9 років тому +2

      You can also just use another statement of the definition of a factorial: For whole number n, n! = n(n-1)!
      Plugging in 1, you end up with 1! = 1(1-1)! = 1(0)!
      From the very leftmost term, we know 1!= 1, through transitivity, we now know
      1=1*0!=0!
      Therefor, 0! must be 1

  • @jordantheoneandonly3880
    @jordantheoneandonly3880 4 роки тому +5

    It was cool to see him go into continuous factorials at the end, as a math major, I haven’t learned that yet

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 місяців тому

      Yeah, I loved that he at least mentioned continuous factorials. Although I was looking for a video that much better explained that. I would like to know how I could calculate the exact value of (1/2)! by hand.

  • @legionreaver
    @legionreaver 2 роки тому +9

    I literally know almost nothing about math beyond multiplication and division but this kind of stuff makes me want to know math.

    • @yosefmacgruber1920
      @yosefmacgruber1920 5 місяців тому

      You seriously need to understand algebra if you want to write computer programs or do spreadsheets. But I figure you need to know some serious advanced mathematics, if you want to balance the field equations to levitate the flying cars of the future.

  • @ashishjog
    @ashishjog 7 років тому +486

    "0!=1" well that's quite obvious for Programmers!!!

    • @bowel_movement
      @bowel_movement 5 років тому +23

      !0 == 1
      but, !0 !== 1

    • @hachikouji1850
      @hachikouji1850 5 років тому +8

      @@bowel_movement 0!=1

    • @TheMegaxPlus
      @TheMegaxPlus 5 років тому +32

      @@bowel_movement you forgot the semicolons. That's going to explode

    • @pheonix3862
      @pheonix3862 5 років тому +8

      @@TheMegaxPlus that's only if it's c#

    • @Xnoob545
      @Xnoob545 5 років тому +3

      !0.
      Not 0 = 1
      *BINARY QUCK MAFFS*

  • @therealepicguy
    @therealepicguy 10 років тому +43

    so -1! breaks math and 1! is 1 well that's discrimination!

  • @iqbalmridha7711
    @iqbalmridha7711 2 роки тому

    tremendous explanation.
    I owe to you for providing us with such a crucial lesson

  • @rftghjkyui
    @rftghjkyui Рік тому

    The moment you say "there isn't" is so insightful and comical, thanks!

  • @redtaileddolphin1875
    @redtaileddolphin1875 7 років тому +34

    My favourite part of he video is when James takes away the last coin and Brady zooms in on an empty spot on a table (yes I know it's to show the 0 objects but out of context it's hilarious)

  • @speedyguy8
    @speedyguy8 9 років тому +227

    You've broken maths, stop that!
    lol

  • @antoniomrubio
    @antoniomrubio 4 роки тому

    Thank you for correcting the formula for gamma(n) in the description.

  • @nightseer1663
    @nightseer1663 3 роки тому +8

    "There is zero objects"
    *Zooms in on the paper*

  • @thekenmatax18
    @thekenmatax18 7 років тому +709

    Everything was completely fine until the Gamma thing kicked in.

    • @iamthinking2252_
      @iamthinking2252_ 7 років тому +1

      thekenmatax at least I have a half baked idea of what γ is... Sort of

    • @zachn2876
      @zachn2876 7 років тому +21

      The lowercase gamma is used for Euler-Mascheroni constant. The gamma function is always denoted by the uppercase gamma.

    • @RobShmit
      @RobShmit 7 років тому +34

      All I know is that it ended WW2, haha

    • @kgeorgeg7
      @kgeorgeg7 7 років тому +13

      he drew/wrote it in his own way of calligraphy... Gamma upercase is that - Γ - you may know it that way.

    • @rudi-gs2pd
      @rudi-gs2pd 7 років тому

      same here

  • @bob123789456
    @bob123789456 10 років тому +62

    if you go by the logic he uses then 0! should be 0. there's no "one" way to arrange something that's not there. there's no way to arrange them.

  • @fazlurahmanshaik7572
    @fazlurahmanshaik7572 3 роки тому +1

    Brilliant. Great teacher.
    0! = 1! = 1. Very tempting drop off the factorial notation and we get 0 = 1.

    • @boogathon
      @boogathon 2 роки тому

      You've broken the maths!

  • @georgemckenzie2525
    @georgemckenzie2525 4 роки тому

    Thank you for what brings you joy

  • @Fucisko
    @Fucisko 8 років тому +117

    But if 1! = 1 and 0! = 1, wouldn't that mean according to the graph that 0.5! =1? Woudln't that be true for any number between 0 and 1?

    • @Airblader
      @Airblader 8 років тому +63

      Ma4zu6 x^2 is 1 for x = -1 and x = 1, but that doesn't imply that it's 1 for every x in between.

    • @Fucisko
      @Fucisko 8 років тому +48

      Well his graph implied that. If those points are connected and we can get values between them, and there is straight line between 1 and 0 then the points on that line must have the same value, no?

    • @trickeyD
      @trickeyD 8 років тому

      Ma4zu6 exactly what i was thinking.

    • @glitchxero4687
      @glitchxero4687 8 років тому +2

      Ma4zu6 I was just going to comment that same thing. Based on the graph, the factorial of any number on the number line which is less than zero is equal to one. Unfortunately, I see you left your comment 3 weeks ago and haven't had an answer. Any actual mathematicians out there able to weigh in on this?

    • @Airblader
      @Airblader 8 років тому +2

      Glitch Xero I actually have answered this weeks ago and the answer is still the same: no, this is not true. Just look it up.

  • @davidwhickox
    @davidwhickox 9 років тому +9

    3:12 *pulls out his entire life savings*

  • @CalikL
    @CalikL 4 роки тому +1

    It’s funny how very simple change of perspective can show totally different solution. Where I come from any factorial is 1x2x3x..etc. I know it sounds silly but putting it ‘from behind’ -> 3x2x1 actually changes my perspective and understanding

  • @benguiles6252
    @benguiles6252 2 роки тому

    This is a great lesson in the difference between what a mathematical operation is and how to compute it.

  • @supermanadamio
    @supermanadamio 8 років тому +18

    I love the way the camera zooms in on the zero objects.

  • @peartkishi
    @peartkishi 10 років тому +21

    I completely lost it when when he started Gamma

  • @antwisteven4779
    @antwisteven4779 2 роки тому

    Mathematics is a spirit and I’ve been impacted very much. I’m really appreciating your goodness

  • @diabl2master
    @diabl2master 4 роки тому +4

    My favourite reasoning is that it is an _empty product_ and 1 is the multiplicative identity - it _is_ the empty product - the product with no terms. Similarly, a^0 is an empty product. In the same way, an empty sum is 0 - if you use ∑ notation and put the limits as n=0 to n=-1, there are no elements of the sum and it is 0.

    • @angelmendez-rivera351
      @angelmendez-rivera351 2 роки тому

      Exactly! This is also my favorite reasoning. More precisely, you can think of n! as being defined as the product of (1, 2, ..., n). Hence 3! is the product of (1, 2, 3), 2! is the product of (1, 2), 1! is the product of (1), and 0! is the product of (). Since the product of () is 1, 0! = 1.

  • @ashenold
    @ashenold 10 років тому +74

    You've broken maths, Brady, stop that...

  • @abdullahozgur
    @abdullahozgur 7 років тому +65

    You are much better than my math teacher

    • @B3Band
      @B3Band 7 років тому +3

      He's also much better than you. And so is your math teacher.

    • @user-kc4oj5vs4v
      @user-kc4oj5vs4v 7 років тому +4

      Bloodbath and Beyond Well that was rude. no need to put people down because you had a bad day.

    • @B3Band
      @B3Band 7 років тому

      I had a great day, made better by your reaction :)

    • @Peter_1986
      @Peter_1986 7 років тому +1

      Peter Xenopoulos
      I usually just Flag those people nowadays, this at least seems to hide their comments so I don't need to see them. xD

    • @abdullahozgur
      @abdullahozgur 7 років тому +1

      Laurelindo yeah

  • @garethpearce8699
    @garethpearce8699 4 роки тому +2

    I think it's worth stressing here that there's a certain pragmatism to extending definitions beyond their initial domain. Factorial is well defined for the natural numbers. It's a useful function there, so maybe it's worth finding a natural extension of that in other domains. When we add 0 to the natural numbers, setting f(0)=1 preserves a bunch of properties that we like about factorial.

  • @PaulMats
    @PaulMats 4 роки тому +5

    I liked how he fast zoomed to an emtpy space

  • @RichardOpokuEngineer
    @RichardOpokuEngineer 5 років тому +45

    Took such a short time to make me understand this. Now I can use it boldly without having to memorize anything.

  • @nanoic2964
    @nanoic2964 9 років тому +46

    In C and C++ != is the not equal to operator so 0 != 1 would be True.

    • @stevenvanhulle7242
      @stevenvanhulle7242 9 років тому +3

      Fester Blats It's a valid mathematical statement. Mathematical statements can be true or false, and this one is false.
      It's because of this ambiguity that Niklaus Wirth chose ":=" for assignment when he designed the language Pascal:
      "a := a + 1"
      and used "=" to test for equality:
      "if a = b then ..."

    • @jerrytang3047
      @jerrytang3047 9 років тому

      Isnt that a function where its "a = (a1 +(a2 +(a3...+ainfinity)) +1

    • @BaeFell
      @BaeFell 8 років тому

      Fester Blats You do the same thing for whatever these are called (bad example): 5x + 2 = 4 - 3x

    • @muhrtanitokrates7223
      @muhrtanitokrates7223 8 років тому +1

      Manga max hahaha funny

    • @0EEVV0
      @0EEVV0 8 років тому

      wow i wish i knew that. Oh wait i do...

  • @lachlanokeefe8020
    @lachlanokeefe8020 Рік тому +4

    so basically the factorial function is defined such that it works how we want it to work.

  • @marc-antoine6298
    @marc-antoine6298 2 роки тому +1

    There's a mistake in the gamma function. It's the integral from 0 to infinity of t^(n-1)e^(-t)dt or in TeX, int_0^\infty t^{n-1}e^{-t}dt.

  • @kalokal5812
    @kalokal5812 7 років тому +246

    0! = 1
    0 != 1
    There's a difference

  • @MrSilki2
    @MrSilki2 7 років тому +147

    i saw thumbnail 0!=1 and i thought he explains why zero isn't equal to one... oh programming.

    • @nikosv6731
      @nikosv6731 6 років тому

      Feel u m8

    • @greekfire995
      @greekfire995 6 років тому

      At least you get a true statement regardless.

  • @navvyeanand2083
    @navvyeanand2083 4 роки тому +2

    This reminds me of my favourite quote
    " If you change nothing, nothing will change"

    • @arunabhganodwale1022
      @arunabhganodwale1022 3 роки тому

      That's written on my shirt while I am reading this ' If nothing changes, nothing changes'

  • @the_venomous_viper1234
    @the_venomous_viper1234 4 роки тому +7

    *zero objects*
    _INTENSE ZOOMING_
    *Nothingness intensifies*

  • @attilamagyar91
    @attilamagyar91 7 років тому +892

    0 != 1. Zero is not one. Programmers..?

    • @Savageboi506
      @Savageboi506 7 років тому +22

      That's what I imagined when I saw the thumbnail xD

    • @hussainattai4638
      @hussainattai4638 7 років тому +2

      Hahahaha!

    • @cptshinigami
      @cptshinigami 7 років тому +18

      I was coding in C# just few minutes ago. Then I saw it, that was my first thought.

    • @Savageboi506
      @Savageboi506 7 років тому

      ***** You know you were able to write that comment because of JS, right?

    • @harambe4686
      @harambe4686 7 років тому

      Magyar Attila Eyyyy

  • @isaacmartinez2623
    @isaacmartinez2623 8 років тому +46

    "You broken maths Braidy. Stop that!" 😂 I love numberphile.

  • @2Bretter
    @2Bretter 7 місяців тому +1

    If you see it philosophically, you could say 1 not divided is 1 and as long as there is one observer, there will always be at least one way of presenting what is there or missing.
    1/0 doesn't have to mean 1 divided by 0, it could also mean 1 distance to 0. Which musicaly seen is the same as 1/2 also known as an octave. The string alone is the basic octave.

    • @waltdill927
      @waltdill927 4 місяці тому

      Yes. They are contiguous. It is logic, so philosophy, anyway. 0! asserts that 0 is equal to the absolute value of 1, since 0 is a real integer neither positive nor negative.

  • @BalefulBunyip
    @BalefulBunyip 2 роки тому

    Thanks really interesting. Never heard of non integer factorials before. Nice integral

  • @Drakesfjord
    @Drakesfjord 10 років тому +12

    4:24 MINDBLOW

  • @lin4cba
    @lin4cba 9 років тому +115

    3:14 "who says Mathematician don't make a lot of money? See I got 50p here"
    I feel so sorry for them already :(
    p.s.... nice timing when you says that tho. lol pi

    • @RedInferno112
      @RedInferno112 9 років тому +32

      "3:14, lol pi" - You need some fresh air....

    • @gustavmardby9364
      @gustavmardby9364 9 років тому +3

      im sorry but that´s not even close to pi. In fact that is infinitly far away from pi since pi has an infinite amount of decimals. It is the three first number of pi though..

    • @churchmanner
      @churchmanner 9 років тому +5

      Zain Burney I agree with you.

    • @ForwardBias
      @ForwardBias 9 років тому

      ***** To my knowledge, no coding language has pi as a native constant value...... So you would have to manually type in 3.14 each time, or define it in the program for repeated use, Variable=(Value of pi, to however many decimals you are willing to type). Of course, I have yet to actually study programming enough , so this comment could be completely wrong.... it is merely just a speculation.

    • @ForwardBias
      @ForwardBias 9 років тому

      aiklarung "Of course, I have yet to actually study programming enough , so this comment could be completely wrong.... it is merely just a speculation."

  • @SpencerioQ
    @SpencerioQ 4 роки тому +1

    The way I think of it is a factorial equals all integers 1= 1 in that scenario, so essentially you multiply by 0 zero times.

  • @Nova04550
    @Nova04550 2 роки тому

    I love this guys' passion for math