Matt Parker Reacts to Magic Squares of Squares - Numberphile
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 чер 2023
- Main video: • Magic Squares of Squar...
Go another level deeper with the reaction to the reaction: • Matt Parker reacts to ...
Matt Parker is Standupmaths: / @standupmaths
Tony Várilly-Alvarado: math.rice.edu/~av15/
The Parker Square: • The Parker Square - Nu...
Finite Fields & Return of The Parker Square: • Finite Fields & Return...
A Special Magic Square: • Special Magic Square -...
Magic Square Party Trick: • Magic Square Party Tri...
Parker Square Tee: numberphile.creator-spring.co...
NUMBERPHILE
Website: www.numberphile.com/
Numberphile on Facebook: / numberphile
Numberphile tweets: / numberphile
Numberphile is supported by the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute (MSRI): bit.ly/MSRINumberphile
Videos by Brady Haran
Support us on Patreon: / numberphile
Brady's videos subreddit: / bradyharan
A run-down of Brady's channels: www.bradyharan.com
Sign up for (occasional) emails: eepurl.com/YdjL9
Go another level deeper with Matt's Reaction to his own Reaction: ua-cam.com/video/tD2q2-_5Tyc/v-deo.html
Oh no, Matt accidentally made a recursive function of reactions in Python again...
I didn't quite expected 30 minutes of content, nevermind 90
"Parker surface because we don't like the points we see"
Parker Droste
I clicked on this video because earlier today I was watching it and only got like 10% thru the video. Sorry but I'm not going to watch the rest here, I'm going to numberphile to watch original video. I'm ever so sorry Matt Parker. I love your videos and everything you do. You do everything you do with utmost importance and value to your viewing audience! It took me about 3 minutes to write this message. So I hope that counts towards your total view count! byee3eee and see you in the next video. Okay this message now has taken 4 minutes. Wait make that 4:15 minutes. Ahhh no. 4:25minutrs.. okay I'll stop now!
I like how Matt's name is being tied to many aspects of magic squares, not because he's spent his life doing groundbreaking research into it, but because of a funny meme video.
You call Parker square a meme? Dear sir, I beg you to take that back.
In 1000 years thanks to the fog of history, Matt will probably be referrred to as "the great magic square theorist, with as many concepts to his name as Euler"
At least in the German Wikipedia page about Matt, his Parker square is shown.
Also there is a property of certain mathematical "bodies" (I'm not a mathematician and cannot translate those terms correctly) with are "Parker", if it is not possible to make a magic square of them, and it is "non-Parker", if it is possible to make a magic square of them.
I find that very funny.
@@jochenreichl796it makes sense that it would be on Matt's page. It will be worrying if it's ever on the magic square page :)
The English word for "mathematical bodies" is "mathematical objects" if I understood it right, but most of the time you would say something more specific - you would say what kind of objects they are (number systems or something)
I propose we coin the Parker Meme - when someone's name is attached to a field of work or discipline, not due to the merits of that person's own work in that particular field/discipline, but due to a hilariously unfortunate attempt in such.
It's amazing how Matt is capable of showing the most sincere admiration and interest by pretending to be upset.
It shows that he cares.
What gets me is the little smirk after each horrible, horrible, horrible pun when he's trying not to laugh at its horribleness. This is why I love Matt.
I did not know how much I wanted videos of Matt Parker reacting to other people doing math. This is really enjoyable.
It's 2433 and thanks to these Numberphile videos I finally know why all constructs in math bear either the name "Euler" or "Parker"
Famously, e^oily-macaroni constant was given a name:
The Parker-Oily-Macaroni constant.
My understanding of the Parker square is that if you try really hard you might almost make it.
Or in other words, it is never to late to give up.
"Having a go at it"
16:39 16:41 Is everyone forgetting that the Parker Square doesn't lie on the Parker Surface? Since it doesn't fulfill all conditions (the sum on one diagonal doesn't equal the sum on the other and the rows and columns), and all points on the Parker surface do fulfill this criterion!
That's what makes it the Parker surface! It doesn't even match the Parker square.
It Parker fits, though.
It's a Parker name for it
Parker is like Euler, doesn't matter who did the actual work, we just attribute it to him.
Can you explain more
This really should be the main channel version....
I was unaware of this channel!😮😮😮
I can't believe I'm going to watch this whole video over again just to see his reactions. 😆
SAME LMAO
Will you watch the OTHER reaction video?
@@numberphile2 I know I will!
@@numberphile2 I wasn't prepared for this level of recursion, but yes, I will be watching that tonight.
@@MichaelPetito recursion...
that reaction video is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video which is very similar to that reaction video
Matt's look of self-satisfaction when he concludes he's said something clever is priceless.
2:06 Parker square
15:08 Parker surface
30:02 Parker blob
And 20:20 Parker off-by-one error in the exponent of 2t² (should be 2t¹).
Replying to get you to the top
and then Parker points
22:43 Parker surface again
It is quite nice how evenly spaced out it is: beginning, middle and end.
Parker square: *exists*
"Impressive. Very nice. Now let's see Sallow's"
Matt’s life is divided into two eras. The first one is the “hair era”, as he says. 😂
The haira.
I love how quickly Matt goes from "the poor guy was bullied into naming the surface after me" to "cause that's its name!" 😄
Can we just appreciate either Matt's ability to chew popcorn without noise or Brady's editing of the audio to save our ears from popcorn crunching. :D
I was really hoping this was going to be a 10 second video of Matt just saying “it’s hogwash!” Straight to camera 😂
I look forward to the new "grabs popcorn" gifs
17:44 New merch idea? "Parker surface: lots of good points"
21:28 Also, love the timing for subtle product placement from Mathsgear
Matt, let's crack this problem together, you and us, your followers: write some Parker-python code and somebody will make it 10^50 times faster.
Really appreciate this Brady! Matt is such a legend. What a good sport.
I love the "yes, okay, I know what's coming" look on Matt's face leading up to the Parker Square.
A Parker Surface should have "≠ x3 + x5 + x7" as one of the conditions to preserve the failing diagonal of the Parker Square
This really goes to demonstrate Stigler's Law, that no scientific discovery is name after its original discover. Parker Surface.
Should be renamed Parker's Law tbh.
Thank you! I very much liked Professor Várilly-Alvarado with his clear and compelling exposition. Then this, Matt's reaction video, made it all the more fun! You guys are great.
I was wondering if Matt would give respect to Paper IV, very pleased he did.
The finite field paper and now this, too!
How many more videos before Matt finally has to accept that the Parker Square is now a genuinely important contribution to mathematics?
I finally burst out laughing at 20:53, for some reason that pun was the one that put me over the edge
Having Matt react really makes this video fun and I'm watching the whole thing.....loving it. Thanks Matt and Brady and mathematician who must not be named for making such a great video about magic squares.
He should be named, Anthony Várilly-Alvarado
Wow! How incredible is Toby at explaining things!!!
The "Parker Surface", love it. But wait, there's more....
I am here for all the "Parker Reaction" videos. I enjoy Numberphile videos a lot, and the commentary is very entertaining.
That surface in 9 dimensions is just your old and trustworthy parkerbolic squaraboloid.
Definitely a fan of renaming the Parker Blob to the Parker Manifold
I needed this!
A derivative work: d(Parker)/dt = -hair
"And here we have a Parker triangle. Where do you think that one goes? That's right! It goes in the Parker square hole!"
This is really funny, I love Matt's reactions 💛
3:32 Matt’s face when he reads what’s on the screen haha
Matt Parker: I'm full of interesting points.
Tony Várilly-Alvarado: but no one finds them satisfying.
Happy to learn that Parker's blob gets positively curved when dimensions grow !
OMG. I was watching this and loved the reference to my PhD advisor, Andrew Bremner.
Truly educational. Thanks, Matt.
27:20 That really was an amazing title...
my favorite matt parker reacts video on this channel! (generously)
Matt's facial expressions always crack me up :D
Things to make and do in the 8th dimension.
16:55 I didn't know the Bee Gees were so interested in geometry!
I love that people emailed Matt Parker and were like "Hey, did you think about doing algebra for this?"
If I understand this correctly, this all boils down to it's almost impossible that there's a chance for whole number points to appear on some wavy 2D surface, while for higher orders, you'd 100% expect from a wavy 3D object there to be whole number points... right?
Brady, you're spoiling us and I love it
Matt's math jokes are hilarious...
They are integral to my survival!
Seems like a pretty derivative joke
@@k0pstl939 Please people, come up with sum-thing better.
The maths jokes are multiplying!
You got an infinitesimal chuckle out of me
They are off the charts!
15:15 funny, I was going to suggest that too!
“I always hope for the best.” - Parker
Does the "Parker surface" have hair?
Infinitely many strands of hair
Very low-key reaction. I'm impressed. I've never had a surface or a blob named after me, so I don't know how I'd react.
I now consider “Parker”, in scientific and mathematical nomenclature, an homage to Matt Parker, and his exemplary disregard for fear of mistakes within his share of humanity’s search for things unmistakable.
This is such a meme video I love it.
33:20 I was blown away
What about a cube of cubes? Or larger?
Does the minimum dimension increase by one as the n of n goes up?
The free monoid generated by Matt Parker reactions
19:58 Especially the calculus
Make the duplicates positive and negative numbers squared to dodge the whole duplicates thing
That is really clever!
Absolute classic "comedian" moment in this when Matt sees a joke, doesn't laugh, and then *says* it was very funny.
On my profile in the videos I have a video about my findings on this problem - specifically focusing on the last digit narrows it down to a specific list of combination types... there will either be a diagonal with numbers ending in 5 and the total will end in 75 or all the numbers will have the same last digit.
The worst sort of finite is "My beer is an empty set"
I needed a laugh as I'm feeding my son at 1 am. Thanks for making me almost wake up the family with laughter. The Parker blob and Parker curve section made me just about lose it.
Being up at 1AM while living sleep deprived from taking care of a young’un probably contributed to your reaction too. ;-)
How do you think I know? :-)
love this! 😂
"Zed" =]
Thank you for holding this torch.
I didn't know I needed a matt's react channel until today
I get you, but I think deep down, I always knew.
No, it will never die. It might Parker die, but we will revive it.
Mathematicians doing react content. This is what we need.
This is a point on the surface where popculture intersects with math.
Love it!
We need t-shirts with Parker Surface and Parker Blob!!!
One thing he couldve mentioned is that points on the surface with rational coordinates can be scaled up by a common denominator to get a point with integer coordinates. If all the original rational numbers were distinct the point with integer coordinates does that too.
The reason this is important is because a lot of times when he references the surface hes actually referencing essentially the surface with all irrational points removed. This is the shape that contains elliptic/rational curves in the way he describes.
Please make it a series: Matt reacting to other Numberphile videos eating popcorn ;D
Matt reacting to the shade *chef's kiss*
It wasn't a maths video, it was a genuine dis track.
In the first few seconds, Matt has the look on his face saying "not this again".
17:41 Actually, I think it's more fair to simply say "I have a lot of points." the quality of those points is up for debate.
Parker Points
Came solely to see what Matt thought of Brady throwing him under the bus with that question lol
10:47 "four of the same triangle in a trenchcoat"
2:48 - "back when I had hair", I mean, barely - the headshave was already long overdue at that point! Love, a fellow baldy.
Matt: Makes a joke about making good point, laughs at his joke afterwards then rewards himself with popcorn 🍿 😂 he's so good 👌🏼
I'm so glad I skipped the original video so I can now watch this and it's all new to me 😃
A 3D-Parker Blob is nothing else than the representation of Matt in 4D, I guess 😂
Why is this unlisted?
11:30 the “haira”
😂 I broke at the Parker Blob...
Since I'm not British, can someone tell me if the phrase "Matt Parker is positively curved!" is a compliment or an insult? It sounds like a British insult. If it isn't, perhaps Matt just invented the Parker Insult.
I think he's saying fatter - as its resembling a sphere more, which is positively curved
Paper IV
A New Hope
😂
3:33 smell moonshine
3:43 sip it
Accepted the named surface in 6 seconds 😂
"it's finite all the way down" made whole video worth the price of admission.
We need a Pakergrid, distributed computing for magic squares
33:00 "That's where I exist. Beyond the frontier of current mathematical knowledge."
I was hoping a Parker Square would randomly pop up like in the old videos
It's not a Parker surface if there isn't something... Parker about it
The most unfortunate thing about the Parker Surface, is that the point which is associated with the Parker Square isn't even on the Parker Surface
6 constraints with only 4 unknowns, seems unlikely.
Looking at three of the constraints
a^2+b^2=a^2+c^2
a^2+b^2=a^2+d^2
We get b^2=c^2=d^2. So nope, the only solution is when all of the entries have the same value (up to a change in sign.)