The Music of the Primes - Marcus du Sautoy

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 22 лис 2011
  • The Music of the Primes
    Marcus du Sautoy, Oxford University
    Thursday, May 8, 2008, at 6:00 pm
    MIT, Compton Laboratories
    Building 26, Room 26-100
    Access via 60 Vassar Street
    Marcus du Sautoy, author of the The Music of the Primes, will discuss the mystery of prime numbers, the history behind the Riemann hypothesis and the ongoing quest to solve it.
    Why did Beckham choose the number 23 shirt? How is 17 the key to the evolutionary survival of a strange species of cicada? Prime numbers are the atoms of arithmetic -- the hydrogen and oxygen of the world of numbers. Despite their fundamental importance to mathematics, they represent one of the most tantalizing enigmas in the pursuit of human knowledge. In 1859, the German mathematician Bernhard Riemann put forward an idea -- a hypothesis -- that seemed to reveal a magical harmony at work in the numerical landscape. A million dollars now await the person who can unravel the mystery of the hidden music that might explain the cacophony of the primes.
    Marcus du Sautoy is Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of Wadham College. He is author of numerous academic articles and books on mathematics. He has been a visiting Professor at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris, the Max Planck Institute in Bonn, the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the Australian National University in Canberra.
    Marcus du Sautoy is author of the best-selling popular mathematics book The Music of the Primes published by Fourth Estate in 2003 and translated into 10 languages. It has won two major prizes in Italy and Germany for the best popular science book of the year. His new book Finding Moonshine: A Mathematician's Journey Through Symmetry is also published by Fourth Estate and was released in March 2008.
    Our thanks to the MIT Mathematics Department for hosting this event.
    www.claymath.org/public_lectur...
    www.claymath.org/public_lectur...

КОМЕНТАРІ • 67

  • @innertubez
    @innertubez 5 років тому +32

    This video is 3607 seconds long. 3607 is a prime number.

    • @sonnyobrien
      @sonnyobrien 10 місяців тому

      This is correct or false you tell me😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

  • @mikegattotv
    @mikegattotv 11 років тому +3

    He is MUCH better as a lecturer than he is on TV shows. Really enjoyed this.

  • @eenblanke
    @eenblanke 11 років тому +5

    his book fired me up for the Riemann hypothesis, an excellent work!

  • @travisbaskerfield
    @travisbaskerfield 7 років тому +7

    Best explanation of the Riemann Hypothesis I've heard.

  • @sajateacher
    @sajateacher 9 років тому +9

    What a fantastic presentation: entertaining and informative.

  • @SeanDavidOfficial
    @SeanDavidOfficial 9 років тому +4

    Yes! Love it!

  • @90chiellini
    @90chiellini 11 років тому

    i can listen this guy for ever

  • @monojder
    @monojder 12 років тому

    thank u so much for uploading this

  • @JoQuailCello
    @JoQuailCello 9 років тому +2

    Fantastic.

  • @tomp2008
    @tomp2008 8 років тому +1

    awesome.. great movie at the end too, Sneakers

  • @telesniper2
    @telesniper2 12 років тому +1

    Where can I read more about the calculations performed in adding harmonics to the logarithmic interval which gives an explicit formula for primes as described at about 47:00 ?

  • @JuanGabrielOyolaCardona
    @JuanGabrielOyolaCardona 2 роки тому

    Thanks for sharing 😃🇨🇴

  • @MadaxeMunkeee
    @MadaxeMunkeee 11 років тому

    This was an excellent lecture

  • @debtmaster
    @debtmaster 11 років тому +1

    The only book I've read (in my free time) that actually gave and evaluated the actual equation was John Derbyshire's Prime Obsession, although it didn't interpret them as harmonics. It also goes into more depth about the calculus behind the Riemann zeta function and how it relates to the prime numbers.

  • @UnorderedAccessViews
    @UnorderedAccessViews 8 років тому +1

    Beautiful talk about string theory

  • @mlfnascimento
    @mlfnascimento 11 років тому +1

    Very interesting presentation on number primes done by professor Sautoy, based on his nice book

  • @Moronvideos1940
    @Moronvideos1940 7 років тому +2

    I downloaded this great video

  • @Antuan2911
    @Antuan2911 11 років тому

    My best book ever!
    by a wonderful man...

  • @mterada2708
    @mterada2708 3 роки тому

    Very nice Yardbird Suite and performance.

  • @dlbattle100
    @dlbattle100 6 років тому

    I have sound turned all the way up everywhere I can and it's still too quiet really.

  • @Aleksei5055
    @Aleksei5055 12 років тому +2

    I like that, "pattern searchers"... I think a lot of people who obsess over prime numbers would def label themselves as this... also it fits really into everything... I am a pattern searcher!

  • @chikenpaww
    @chikenpaww 3 роки тому

    Very impressive lesson

  • @1212JackJohnson
    @1212JackJohnson 11 років тому

    is an accountant, but non-mathematician. I enjoyed this explanation of a hypothesis I did not think I would understand.

  • @jrg8
    @jrg8 11 років тому +1

    Yes search Yitang "Tom" Zhang.

  • @EulerToiler
    @EulerToiler 10 років тому +2

    For a visual exploration of Xi see my vid "Riemann hypothesis with J.S.Bach".
    You need to like Bach, quite. Includes some items from recent travels.

  • @cwbeas
    @cwbeas 11 років тому +1

    54:10
    "Google"----I laughed so hard

  • @dominic2446
    @dominic2446 6 років тому +2

    16:34 so I'm bushi.. whats that?

  • @0001gio
    @0001gio 2 роки тому

    Salve, è possibile creare un "pentagramma" con i numeri primi?

  • @Nombrespremiers-info
    @Nombrespremiers-info 9 років тому +1

    The prime numbers distribution is here:
    accueil | loqiquedespremiers

  • @GolDDranks
    @GolDDranks 11 років тому

    I love his accent!!

  • @Myrslokstok
    @Myrslokstok 11 років тому +1

    Starts 2:40 min.

  • @enlongchiou
    @enlongchiou 8 років тому +1

    Realization of sieve of Eratosthenes show pattern of prime from start point, first 1 is not a prime, 2 is a prime, count to 3 have 2 prime 2 and 3, 4 have 4*(2-1)/2+0/2+1-1=2 prime. 5 have 5*(2-1)/2+mod(5,2)/2+1-1=3 prime, 6 have 6*(2-1)/2+0/2+1-1=3 prime, 7 have 7*1/2+1/2+1-1=4 prime, 8 have 8/2+0/2+1-1=4 prime, 9 have 9*((2-1)/2)*((3-1)/3)+mod(9,2)/2+mod(9,3)/3-mod(9.6)/6+2-1=3+1/2+0/3-3/6+2-1=4 prime, by induction like add 1 to 10 have formula n(n+1)/2, can get formula equal to n time reverse of Euler product for prime number equal and less n^1/2 plus mod(n,p)/p(p here is combination of prime equal and less than n^(1/2), plus and minus sign decide by Merten function)+total of prime number equal and less n^(1/2) minus 1, by liouville theorem equal to Riemann Hypothesis. if Merten function count this way never go out of bound, because it equal to 0 from start to infinity.

  • @barneyquiberon
    @barneyquiberon Рік тому

    Great

  • @SkyFoxTale
    @SkyFoxTale 9 років тому +2

    NIce jazz :D

  • @WarzSchoolchild
    @WarzSchoolchild 11 років тому

    A 'Squareness Test' reveals that the Dual-Prime Rectangle is about 106/1 ratio. eg. p*q - (p*q)^0.5 = 9996748.73641... we then square that and subtract it from p*q^2, Sadly space does not permit details. 9999911 x 106 = 1059990566 & 1059990566 x 4 = 4239962264 & 4239962264^0.5 = 65114.9926... 65115^2 = 4239963225, & 4239963225 - 4239962264 = 961 = 31 x 31. & 65115 - 31 = 65084, & 65084/106 = 614 = 2 x 307. FACTORED! A "Squareness Test deploying square root, is a Deterministic Factoring Method.

  • @dannycalcaben4404
    @dannycalcaben4404 Рік тому

    Prof. Sautoy, give me a chance to talk here., I'll demonstrate to you a formula that generates prime numbers. I have been keeping this formula for three years now and I don't want to publish it in fear that someone might steal my idea.

  • @GaXiTin
    @GaXiTin 12 років тому

    I suppose that the Cicadas don't know the period of the predator either, so that they can do what you said. Therefore it's very risky if they choose the period of 10 years

  • @1111122234
    @1111122234 10 місяців тому

    I've been chasing this dragon for the past 26 yrs. I'm getting closer and closer and certain agencies have started to take notice of my progress.

    • @whitb6111
      @whitb6111 Місяць тому

      You should maybe get checked for schizophrenia. Seriously, seek help.

  • @kasperm.r.guldberg7354
    @kasperm.r.guldberg7354 4 роки тому

    35:45-35:59
    Hey, you mathematicians out there, help me out.
    Isn't his claim false here? If p=1:15, you don't have to wait 15 trials for a success (on average), do you?
    Alternatively, if I roll a dice, I don't on average have to roll 6 six times to get a 6, do I?

  • @revedwardloper564
    @revedwardloper564 6 років тому

    What if someone can throw out the majority of prev research and show primes are misunderstood?

    • @Jehannum2000
      @Jehannum2000 4 роки тому

      Unlike other science, in maths when something's proven it stays proven.

  • @midinerd
    @midinerd 7 років тому

    comment section sure took a nose-dive

  • @andrewxc1335
    @andrewxc1335 9 років тому +1

    307 & 32,573. Found within 2 mins. :)

  • @namanjani7477
    @namanjani7477 11 років тому

    9999911 = 307 x 32573 ? btw Nice suit !

  • @deletedaccount2580
    @deletedaccount2580 3 роки тому

    54:10

  • @montetown5741
    @montetown5741 8 років тому +4

    I always had that raw gift of mathematics. As soon as I saw this question he asked the audience for the 3rd line - c2n.me/3yACWyD
    I got a bit stressed for the first 5 seconds, and then the last 5 seconds very stressed knowing that he was only giving about 10 seconds for the audience, and then I decided, "There isnt a pattern" - that was the answer. i didnt cowar and think to myself nervously, "I can't find it, I am waiting now for you to show me it" - I confidently concluded, THERE ISN'T ONE. ITS RANDOM. A million processes per second scouring over it trying to find the pattern. And then realising, "Oh he is having a joke on us, there is not a pattern. He is next going to reveal to the audience he is just having a joke" - My scout for the pattern then went quickly into the scout for his frame of the ruse and there I discovered it clear as day, and concluded it on my life with confidence - there is no pattern, he is having a loan of the audience.
    Maths is just something some people are born with. I am hopeless at languages and remembering people and artwork and laws and everything. I have cut my way through life only by that forte of just finding maths so easy. At Uni in undergrad we got assignments to read peer reviewed physical chemistry papers and I would come back two weeks late because of a head-block and finally declaring and showing the professor that the whole paper, although may have come to an apparent conclusion, even though apparently affirmed experimentally, in fact the maths in this paper is flawed. So that the observations were true, but the maths/explanation is totally wrong and therefore the paper is for the wastebasket. The guy was one of the cosigners of the paper. He was so embarrassed he failed me and kicked me out of the faculty because I was not a jew like him, and he had to uphold his jew-status rather than let the whole faculty know that they had found a goyim brain bigger than theirs, who could spot their folly a mile away.
    I cant remember the names or accomplishments of any of the mathematicians of history, vaguely at best - I would recall it if told and could not be fooled into thinking it had been another name. But alone recall I have none without great stress and mental block.
    But give me the maths, lay it out, Actually I was part of this group of stupid "rebels" when at Uni doing the maths degree, and we would go to the bar everyday and compete over who could go to the least lectures (sometimes just go to look out for a girl we had a crush on) and then a week before the exams hunt down someone in the lectures to give us a full photocopy of their lecture notes they took, and then literally study the whole course of 13 weeks in 24 hours without sleep and next day PASS. My friends were smarter than me (I think in hindsight they were lying about the study they did). But I would literally do the whole 13 week course in 24 hours drinking copious amounts of coffee, forcing myself against sleep, (if I had had better drugs maybe I would have done better or maybe not, dont know because only used black coffee) and then get to the exam, totally exhausted, studying in my face till the moment/minute because the exam and then dropping the lecture notes on the ground and walking up, sitting down, walk out at very last minute with examiner pulling pen out of my hand, and then end up in range from 50-60.
    I will tell you something. What FUCKED me in those 24 hours was always the fact I discovered ERRORS in the lecture notes of the lecturer or the person who wrote them down. If I had had pure perfect notes without one fucking error I would have walked out with 90%. The failure was that I was assuming that the notes from the lecturer and messenger of them were perfectly transcribed and could not be wrong, that I must be wrong, and in the middle of that night, from 3-6am, I have become stuck on one of those errors, assuming faithfully they were right, while not realising I had discovered they were in err.
    Once I went to see a lecturer the day before an exam .and in this case I had a set of notes that he had kindly given to the students, and I pointed out this place I had been stuck on for hours, and that it has to be wrong. And he looks at it, and then looks back up at me, and says, "I have been using those notes for 5 years, you have not even come to lectures all semester, you are cramming, I know. But Jake you have an amazing mind for maths. You are correct. You are the first student in five years to point this out."
    I want to tell you something, if you are still reading this. That guy was not a jew. But the other one, when I pointed out the maths error in his own authorised peer reviewed proud paper, that it had an embarassing error in logic in it, that was not a typo, that he instead failed me and got me kicked out of the faculty, And what he was headed to work on in that department was something at the time I found fascinating, Laser Chemistry- Where you use lasers instead of chemicals to transform a solution of some chemical into another chemical. It even could have been found through that science to turn lead into gold. And I was there in that faculty in 1995 when nanotechnology was a fantasy. And also battery technology was a new fantasy as well, I mean compared to the amazing power today. And that professor gave all the honours and doctorate positions to JEWS, by pure nepotism. And through this ruse they have managed to occupy and control every university of the west.
    Thank you if you got this far in reading it. At least someone heard my testimony.

  • @acle_
    @acle_ 11 років тому

    lol a bit too late now. search Yitang Zhang

  • @MrOreo76
    @MrOreo76 12 років тому

    it it pronounced "Gos" not "Gaus", and he makes fun in his book of an American saying "Math" instead of "Maths"

  • @badchessplyr
    @badchessplyr 4 роки тому

    the 17 year logic bogus it's 17 year in christian clander . how do we know bugs were using christian clander not other calendar

    • @richarddeese1991
      @richarddeese1991 4 роки тому +1

      Er... a year is 365 (and a bit) days, no matter who's calendar it is. But nature doesn't need one anyway. It's simply the *_rhythm_* of the Moon going 'round the Earth, and the Earth going 'round the Sun. That's a little thing we call *_seasons_***, and nature responds to it, well, ***_naturally._* ;) 𝓡𝓲𝓴𝓴𝓲 𝓣𝓲𝓴𝓴𝓲.

    • @Jehannum2000
      @Jehannum2000 4 роки тому

      Got to say, that's the second dumb comment I've seen from you. A year is a year in any calendar.

  • @badchessplyr
    @badchessplyr 4 роки тому +1

    euclid didn't prove any prime number theorem .there is no proof about it. it is a hypothesis greek don't even know about number all they did was geometry .

  • @apusapus71
    @apusapus71 Рік тому

    Primes do not build other numbers. If I grab 91 counters from a box and try to arrange them into rows and columns, I will have 7 rows and 13 columns with nothing left over. But I made the number 91 because I grabbed the counters. The fact that I chose to arrange them into rows and columns was also my choice. The numbers 7 and 13 had nothing to do with it. An integer is one more than the previous integer, that's all. Why do senior mathematicians peddle this nonsense? It doesn't even work as a metaphor.
    Comparing primes to chemical elements is bogus for another reason: the elements are not at the fundamental level of physical reality. Has he never heard of quantum mechanics, or dark matter, or energy? And what about time?

  • @johnswoboda2986
    @johnswoboda2986 10 років тому

    Got to love the way he stupifies the topic for our transatlantic predecessors while he teaches them something about real football. Nah, just kidding, but seriously, this lecture is average at best. If you want something substantial presented in a smart way I suggest you watch some lectures about computer sience by "Avi Wigderson", he will, enlighten, enchant and broaden your mind at the same time.

  • @divisorplot
    @divisorplot 7 років тому

    transparent enough love you z-ero~! electric magnetic Nicolas tesla 369 she got the jack she got the jack ring holder it's four you Shakespeare know I respect thee as my soul john . [ij] [hijk] pump up the jam isquare minus one L-ove .the egg of nature and philosophy basil valentine . 'Septembers song' gone to see alice marcus all my L-oving Marcus Pythagoras right angle/angle triangel oops triangle whitenoise transparent enough totootwotototootwoto!!!!! cycles of time sir roger penrose cucco cucco wise owl.

  • @MrColinjoyce
    @MrColinjoyce 11 років тому

    Light-weight mathematics raconteur I'm glad I didn't buy the book he's promoting.

  • @gazza2390
    @gazza2390 4 роки тому

    What a complete waste of time