for people unfamiliar with the Euclid's Algorithm, it's actually based upon the lemma: Suppose b = aq + r, then gcd(a, b) = gcd(a, r). You can prove this lemma by contradiction in ~8 lines
In india we do the Euclid division algorithm the same thing in a bit different way it is really awesome to see that a same lemma is done such differently in other nations
Cool fact: Bezout's lemma (that's how I learned it) is actually applcable in any group that's similar enough to Z. I learned a general form of the lemma in a course on group theory. Of course in group theory the notions of gcs and lcm are defined more generally in terms of subgroups and their generating sets. Interesting stuff if you're into that sort of thing.
I have a few suggestions for videos. Here’s just one: Two circles of radius R intersect each at exactly two points. Lines are drawn from each of those points to the center of one of the circles. Those lines and the inner arc of the other circle define a region. What is its maximum area?
I haven't watched this video yet but just judging from the very first statement you wrote at the beginning isn't this just the extended euclidean algorithm
Can you please make a video about why Euclid’s algorithm finds the GCD? We were taught how to do this in the 6th grade I think, but I never thought about why it works until now.
I am sorry, but you did not show that ALL solutions are in the form x=-2+7m and y=7-24m. In theory there can be other solutions then the ones you showed.
Steven Gottlieb I agree with you. But I was just showing an example on how this works. Notice the video is 18 minutes already. Max or I will work out the proof for that in the future on another video.
I have an issue here: After Bézout's identity, ax+by=gcd(a,b), My problem is such as "ax" is known N and "by" is the unknown from the type [-(x-1)*gcd(a,b)] and of course gcd(a,b) is the unknown I'm looking for.
Don't the possible values for Y have to be in the range 0 to (n-1) in our case 0 to (432-1)? ie 7 +432 = 439 but that's greater than 432. so only one solution?
No it is you have to check both sides. 436 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 2 126 = 2 x 3 x 3 x 7 Both sides have a common number 2 x 3 = 6 So, GCD (436,126) = 6
One thing is peculiar. Upto 1960 agebra books, there was no word Euclidean algorithm,a term for determining G.C. D. All are forced to swallow this coinage.Again, Bezout' s identity is renamed as Extended Euclidean Algorithm . This is cultural imperialism.as if no civilisation did not think GCD or HCF
It's not an identity, I don't know why he calls it that. It's an existence claim so clearly not an identity. As for the name, I've learned it as "Bezout's lemma", there's a version of it for integers, a version of it for polynomials and a generalized version of it for groups
The extended Euclidean ALGORITHM is how you find the integers x and y in Euclidean domains (such as the integers). The Bezout identity is the resulting equation. There are mathematical structures where such x and y exist, but even the normal Euclidean algorithm doesn't work. As a general rule, the result isn't the algorithm.
Hei I really like your posts!! but i have a question for you bout 3D topic. ABCD.EFGH Cube, its side is a. Point O is intersection between AC and BD. Determine the distance between line EO and line HB..please answer thiss
Dear prof. Blackpenredpen...you are very good speaker,,...your problems are very interesting, but..please...your carioca is writing sometimes, hard for me to read symbols. Can you improve this symbol's visibility?
Did my 'Calc 3' paper today. Was nervous and made a couple stupid errors and I didn't get a couple of things but on the whole it went ok. One mistake was 4r^4 x 0 x 0 = 4r^4
Question: A dealer bought a number of horses at $344.00 each, and a number of bullocks at $265.00 each. He then discovered that the horses had cost him in all $33.00 more than the bullocks. Now, what is the smallest number of each that he must have bought? [Source: 536 Puzzles by Dudeney #20]
0:19 "Okay in this video I'm going to demonstrate one of the most useful facts in number theory." but you didn't prove anything, you just showed an example. Honestly I must say I'm a bit disappointed with your videos lately. Anyway, it's just what I think so don't let it bother you.
You explain this so well and the only example I have found that I can actually follow, thank you! 😊
I was lazy and didn't want to watch an 18 minute video!
Now, I am more than grateful I clicked and watched. Thank you, best explanation ever!
Thank you for your upbeat atittude that made me feel a lot better!
BIG Thanks man your videos helps a lot as a collage student
This was the best explanation ever! Thank you! You saved my maths exam. :)
Thank you for your explanation, it helps my report so much. And I really like your smile. Thank you
😃
Thank you, you explained it so well that I am confident in passing my discrete maths exam
Nice!! My favorite part is quantifiers "forall" and "exists":D
Eightc yay!
instaBlaster...
for people unfamiliar with the Euclid's Algorithm, it's actually based upon the lemma: Suppose b = aq + r, then gcd(a, b) = gcd(a, r). You can prove this lemma by contradiction in ~8 lines
In india we do the Euclid division algorithm the same thing in a bit different way it is really awesome to see that a same lemma is done such differently in other nations
8:57 this reminds me of finding the multiplicative inverse in ciphering class
Cool fact: Bezout's lemma (that's how I learned it) is actually applcable in any group that's similar enough to Z. I learned a general form of the lemma in a course on group theory.
Of course in group theory the notions of gcs and lcm are defined more generally in terms of subgroups and their generating sets. Interesting stuff if you're into that sort of thing.
That's cool! I have taken a course on group theory but have not heard of Bezout's Lemma. I'll have to look more into that.
It feels so weird to have done calculus without having learned this stuff.. thanks!
I was so hoping at 11:43 for "I will call this x-naught and y-naught because... why not?"
mjones207 oh... I should have done that. :)
Woah!! Wonderful explination Love from indiaa💗
11:45 "I will call this x naught and y naught because why not" is what you should've said! you missed a pun opportunity. I'm disappointed.
damn this was a really clever solution, props to bezout!
Please do a videos on how to find inverse of a function
If you can't solve the equation y=f(x) for x then use:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_inversion_theorem
Thank u. U may arrange a video on Bezout identity and Uclid Algorithm.
EUCLID please!
this is better than the resources my uni has thanks
I have a few suggestions for videos. Here’s just one:
Two circles of radius R intersect each at exactly two points. Lines are drawn from each of those points to the center of one of the circles. Those lines and the inner arc of the other circle define a region.
What is its maximum area?
Shree Ganesh I don’t know the answer with 100% certainty, but…
…I think (going off of memory here) it’s (-πR^2 + R√3)/6.
Thank you man, this is so useful
Thank you for a very nice explaination. Keep it up 🙂
thank you black pen red pen
Damn, this is flipping awesome explanation! ♥
Thank You vey much. Sir.
Yay!
I haven't watched this video yet but just judging from the very first statement you wrote at the beginning isn't this just the extended euclidean algorithm
Amazing explanation 👌👌
Excellent explaination
Can you please make a video about why Euclid’s algorithm finds the GCD? We were taught how to do this in the 6th grade I think, but I never thought about why it works until now.
This might help medium.com/i-math/why-does-the-euclidean-algorithm-work-aaf43bd3288e
Nice as usual ! thanks!
nice, i didn't know about the lcm trick. Thanks
How can we prove the validity of a theorem with a single example?
Do the numbers on the side of Euclid’s algorithm always multiply to also give you the gcd or is that a coincidence
ikr i noticed that also
What do the pen colours represent? Is the black colour to do with the original question while red is an insertion or something?
I am sorry, but you did not show that ALL solutions are in the form x=-2+7m and y=7-24m. In theory there can be other solutions then the ones you showed.
Steven Gottlieb I agree with you. But I was just showing an example on how this works. Notice the video is 18 minutes already. Max or I will work out the proof for that in the future on another video.
blackpenredpen Can you plz prove that Bézout Coefficients are not unique? Are there any numbers were there *_are_* unique?
Steven Gottlieb It does give every solution, unless m is restricted to integers.
Thank you for responding!
Yes, every solution was given. The problem is that was not proven. Even BPRP agrees with that.
I have an issue here: After Bézout's identity, ax+by=gcd(a,b), My problem is such as "ax" is known N and "by" is the unknown from the type [-(x-1)*gcd(a,b)] and of course gcd(a,b) is the unknown I'm looking for.
What does the upside-down A and the backwards E mean?
AddQ he literally said it in the video
For All and There Exists
AddQ Quantifiers. You will encounter it in a discrete math or logic course.
Why do x and y have to be integers? If you fill in complex numbers for m they cancel out as well, right?
Should I multiply it out?
whats so important about bezouts indentity
why he holding that black ball ?
The Number Theory playlist in the description contains a private video at #4: I have watched all the others so what am I missing?
your way of finding gcd is better than text book
It's technically the same way, but I agree that writing it out in that equation style is confusing as hell
Don't the possible values for Y have to be in the range 0 to (n-1) in our case 0 to (432-1)? ie 7 +432 = 439 but that's greater than 432. so only one solution?
9:09 “multiple掉”
Why does he have ball in his hands?
@4:41 you had a mistake the gcd(436, 126) = 2
wtf
No it is you have to check both sides.
436 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 x 3 x 2
126 = 2 x 3 x 3 x 7
Both sides have a common number 2 x 3 = 6
So, GCD (436,126) = 6
@@itsalencraft1717 divide 436%6!=0 126%6=0 how is 6 the gcd
One thing is peculiar. Upto 1960 agebra books, there was no word Euclidean algorithm,a term for determining G.C. D. All are forced to swallow this coinage.Again, Bezout' s identity is renamed as Extended Euclidean Algorithm . This is cultural imperialism.as if no civilisation did not think GCD or HCF
let:
1/(a-b)(a+b)=A/(a+b)+B/(a-b)
and form it
■A(a-b)+B(a+b)=1
■a(B+A)+b(B-A)=1
Here are two cases of a Bezout's Lemma.
say some thing about that.
so the final x is -2+7m and final y is 7-24 m?? :)
proof is more difficult than application
Very helpful!!
Bezout Identity? I thought the name is Extended Euclidean
It's not an identity, I don't know why he calls it that. It's an existence claim so clearly not an identity. As for the name, I've learned it as "Bezout's lemma", there's a version of it for integers, a version of it for polynomials and a generalized version of it for groups
The extended Euclidean ALGORITHM is how you find the integers x and y in Euclidean domains (such as the integers). The Bezout identity is the resulting equation. There are mathematical structures where such x and y exist, but even the normal Euclidean algorithm doesn't work. As a general rule, the result isn't the algorithm.
Shachar H Wikipedia calls it the Bezout identity and I think I've heard that term used in Bezout domians (things where the x and y always exist).
Both Bezout's Identity and Bezout's Lemma are correct.
How to use it if a+b is the exponent and thier gcd(a,b)=1 ??
Hey Blackpenredpen, do a video on the (complex valued) infinite series Sum(i^(n-1)/n) from n = 1 to infinity.
Change your lighting system, board can’t be seen easily
Thanks!
Hei I really like your posts!! but i have a question for you bout 3D topic. ABCD.EFGH Cube, its side is a. Point O is intersection between AC and BD. Determine the distance between line EO and line HB..please answer thiss
Amazing!
Awesome!!!
Dear prof. Blackpenredpen...you are very good speaker,,...your problems are very interesting, but..please...your carioca is writing sometimes, hard for me to read symbols. Can you improve this symbol's visibility?
fucking genius
there is also a blue pen LOL : )
9:02 something magic happened
tysm
Did my 'Calc 3' paper today. Was nervous and made a couple stupid errors and I didn't get a couple of things but on the whole it went ok. One mistake was 4r^4 x 0 x 0 = 4r^4
We want more IMO Problem
Question: A dealer bought a number of horses at $344.00 each, and a number of bullocks at $265.00 each. He then discovered that the horses had cost him in all $33.00 more than the bullocks. Now, what is the smallest number of each that he must have bought? [Source: 536 Puzzles by Dudeney #20]
Great!
“Because we are know we are smart, don’t do that “ 😂😂😂
Superb..
You are calling it y naught because why not xD
WHY A.L. AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!
Ιωάννης - Αθανάσιος Χαραλάμπους
What's AL?
Can you do a video about 1+2+3+4....=-1/12
mathologer
Hi!
whohoo solved
Hello
❤❤❤
I love you
0:19 "Okay in this video I'm going to demonstrate one of the most useful facts in number theory." but you didn't prove anything, you just showed an example. Honestly I must say I'm a bit disappointed with your videos lately. Anyway, it's just what I think so don't let it bother you.
He 'demonstrated'
I did demonstrate. Usually this is easier when we first see an example then see the proof.
Okay, then sorry for what I said. But I still prefer proofs than examples.
Max does lots of proofs : )
I will do so too later.
Yeah I know, I subscribed when you uploaded "Practice your Trig".
Ensemble theory d(^^)