Infinity is bigger than you think - Numberphile

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 5 лип 2012
  • Sometimes infinity is even bigger than you think... Dr James Grime explains with a little help from Georg Cantor.
    More links & stuff in full description below ↓↓↓
    Minute Physics video on this topic • How to Count Infinity (somewhat more fast-paced... but we did film ours BEFORE his was uploaded, so similarities are coincidental... well actually, no they are not... we are all building upon Cantor's work!!)
    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 • 17 тис.

  • @FN-yf3ub
    @FN-yf3ub 5 років тому +5441

    "We're going to talk about infinity..."
    0:11 Draws a fish.

    • @earomc
      @earomc 5 років тому +354

      Daniel Yang wooosh

    • @secretlol69
      @secretlol69 5 років тому +15

      gradle no u

    • @Anonymity55
      @Anonymity55 5 років тому +116

      @@danielyang7366yes but it looks like a fish haven't you seen a fish before

    • @justinthomas7222
      @justinthomas7222 5 років тому +41

      No, it's a fibsh. Sea doggos love them.

    • @nexalusdata2909
      @nexalusdata2909 5 років тому +6

      Yes

  • @funtikthewobblycat
    @funtikthewobblycat 5 років тому +3883

    Great, now i have something to talk about on a first date...

  • @ivankaramasov
    @ivankaramasov 3 роки тому +463

    Cantor was one of the greatest geniuses of mathematics. Truly ahead of his time.

    • @slurpnderp1838
      @slurpnderp1838 2 роки тому +4

      @ODIN Force I agree that infinity is not a number, however, these infinities are clearly different. In math you have to sometimes kind of "make up" numbers. I'm sure you agree with "i" as an imaginary number, and this is similar. If any of these imaginary ideas contradict, they are changed until they don't. Then, what difference is there really between imaginary concepts like this and standard math? They both have defined rules and can sometimes co exist

    • @pentachronic
      @pentachronic 2 роки тому +4

      @@slurpnderp1838 This is where I have a problem. If you state infinity as the set of all numbers then you can't have different versions of it. If you state that you only have even numbers then it is not infinity. It is a subset of infinity with infinity as a limit.

    • @spooderdan9127
      @spooderdan9127 2 роки тому

      @@pentachronic I think the concept of infinity isn't the set of all real numbers or real and imaginary numbers but just a set with an unending amount of elements an infinite amount of elements. If you define infinity as the way you did with it being the set of all numbers then you limit the abstraction that comes from the concept of unending amounts.

    • @pentachronic
      @pentachronic 2 роки тому +1

      @@spooderdan9127 I understand it as being an infinite set, however you can't just take a subset and assume it is of infinite size). That defies all logic and mathematical rigour. The subset would be a smaller size than the original.

    • @kianasheibani1708
      @kianasheibani1708 2 роки тому

      @@pentachronic "Infinity" here is a cardinality, not a set. The set of all natural numbers is isomorphic to the set of all even natural numbers, so they have the same cardinality and are thus both infinite.

  • @golightning291
    @golightning291 4 роки тому +107

    4:25 Brady's "Do it, man" is one of the coolest things I've heard in a while

  • @MortaLyt
    @MortaLyt 5 років тому +4730

    He sounds and is capable of being in Harry Potter series.

    • @ayushmaanrajput9483
      @ayushmaanrajput9483 5 років тому +93

      Bhai pubg khel na xD

    • @hahdhsjsjrkfn
      @hahdhsjsjrkfn 5 років тому +99

      MortaL Well, he's British.

    • @nak605
      @nak605 5 років тому +26

      Fir bhi iconic to legend hai🤣

    • @CheesePizza66
      @CheesePizza66 5 років тому +54

      @MortaL what are you doing here 😂 oh i know....you love MATHEMATICS right??

    • @ggb786
      @ggb786 5 років тому +10

      Magar tu to apna Harry Potter hai mortal 😂😂

  • @DJfractalflight
    @DJfractalflight 5 років тому +1527

    “To infinity and beyond”
    -Buzz Lightyear
    See, he knew what he was talking about.

    • @budesmatpicu3992
      @budesmatpicu3992 5 років тому +38

      because there is something much bigger than infinity: STUPIDITY!

    • @pkgamma
      @pkgamma 5 років тому +12

      He’s referring to unconditionally infinite!

    • @DJfractalflight
      @DJfractalflight 5 років тому +2

      Philip Kuo deep 😳

    • @KevinKurzsartdisplay
      @KevinKurzsartdisplay 4 роки тому +14

      The joke is, Buzz Lightyear didn’t know that it’s by definition impossible to reach infinity so he just kept flying and flying and was never heard from again

    • @cyrusccclxix2096
      @cyrusccclxix2096 4 роки тому +1

      Maybe he was referring to a flat earth

  • @zenterno-zt1pl
    @zenterno-zt1pl 4 роки тому +372

    Can you zoom in more plz I want to see the atoms

    • @cythism8106
      @cythism8106 3 роки тому +39

      I have some heart shattering news for you. The size of an atom makes it so individual atoms can't be seen. Atoms are smaller then any wavelength of visible light.

    • @_xndr7027
      @_xndr7027 3 роки тому +63

      @@cythism8106 you’ve ruined his dreams

    • @damntisisannoyinirl2419
      @damntisisannoyinirl2419 3 роки тому +2

      @@_xndr7027 lol

    • @AzureNova_Art
      @AzureNova_Art 3 роки тому +5

      @@cythism8106 r/whooosh

    • @AlI-xy9jx
      @AlI-xy9jx 3 роки тому +4

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH this comment made me laugh so much. Thank you hahhahahahaha

  • @dexter2392
    @dexter2392 5 років тому +542

    "Guys, it's a scam, -1/12 is actually the biggest number."
    - Ramanujan

    • @peppers1587
      @peppers1587 4 роки тому +40

      Thyron Dexter you don’t know your limits.😀

    • @gentleman_gaming6529
      @gentleman_gaming6529 4 роки тому +19

      That's a scam because it's sum of all the numbers but not the biggest. -1/13 is actually bigger than that, see the difference is there between biggest number and sum of all numbers.

    • @isaacbruner65
      @isaacbruner65 4 роки тому +36

      @@gentleman_gaming6529 it's a Ramanujan sum, so -1/12 is not the sum of all positive integers in any way that means anything to the average person.

    • @SparkzUK.
      @SparkzUK. 4 роки тому +1

      0-800-????-???

    • @stephaniemitchell3682
      @stephaniemitchell3682 4 роки тому +3

      Proove it

  • @xyza181
    @xyza181 7 років тому +198

    I wish I had the sparks in my eyes when I talk about my life as this guy does about numbers.

    • @EDD-np3ey
      @EDD-np3ey 7 років тому +6

      0:12 this is not a lemniscate this is a fish !

    • @omikronweapon
      @omikronweapon 5 років тому +1

      still better than Matt's infinity sign though XD

  • @durgle
    @durgle 5 років тому +2513

    this guy is so passionate about it i love every second of this

    • @blzKrg
      @blzKrg 4 роки тому +11

      True

    • @joelvansickle3623
      @joelvansickle3623 4 роки тому +23

      I love it too!!! People won't listen and believe without passion.

    • @economixxxx
      @economixxxx 4 роки тому +6

      7:01 he seems a little frustrated...

    • @luiz4430
      @luiz4430 3 роки тому +6

      @@joelvansickle3623 That's true, it makes a whole difference for us viewers.

    • @mariafe7050
      @mariafe7050 3 роки тому +1

      Have you seen Cliff?

  • @jesse0398
    @jesse0398 4 роки тому +39

    this feels like an episode of the office

  • @mellinghedd267
    @mellinghedd267 4 роки тому +128

    “Numberphile channel shuts down: forests of the world saved!”

  • @ChillAtWill
    @ChillAtWill 7 років тому +1951

    I love the fact that are an infinite amount of number between 0 and 1....

    • @zn4rf
      @zn4rf 7 років тому +318

      Well there is a infinite number of numbers between every number :D

    • @ChillAtWill
      @ChillAtWill 7 років тому +67

      really...are you sure? what about lets say 99.5
      and 100?

    • @zn4rf
      @zn4rf 7 років тому +216

      sure there is

    • @ChillAtWill
      @ChillAtWill 7 років тому +26

      hmmm... dont know if i trust that

    • @rexroberts7099
      @rexroberts7099 7 років тому +128

      You are indeed correct. Here's my proof generalised to any two distinct real numbers a and b.
      Proof. Suppose a and b are two real number. Without loss of generality, say a

  • @yuichituba
    @yuichituba 10 років тому +2430

    The camera is way too close to his face.

    • @youngmoneyfuture1663
      @youngmoneyfuture1663 10 років тому +1

      Zoomed in XD

    • @AcousticBruce
      @AcousticBruce 10 років тому +86

      The camera is too close to your face on your google+ / youtube avatar.

    • @wojtas2524
      @wojtas2524 10 років тому +19

      I want to see him closer

    • @1shot0neKill
      @1shot0neKill 10 років тому +9

      JESUS IT ZOOMED IN EVEN CLOSER!

    • @qvalster2997
      @qvalster2997 10 років тому +37

      IT'S NOT CLOSE ENOUGH

  • @andrzejkarolak3766
    @andrzejkarolak3766 4 роки тому +53

    "There is no infinity infinite enough to describe how infinitely many different infinities are there." Quote from my introduction to mathematics lecture.

  • @craigruchman7007
    @craigruchman7007 3 роки тому +156

    Poor Cantor... It was one of my greatest moments in math when I understood many of these concepts, what a legacy.

    • @countingfloats
      @countingfloats 2 роки тому +5

      You can't understand something which does not exist. Infinity is one of them.
      You only pretend to understand which is infinity away from the truth.

    • @popsee9745
      @popsee9745 2 роки тому +24

      @@countingfloats muggle

    • @autumnicleaf
      @autumnicleaf Рік тому

      You sure didn't understood a lot; like how to spell his name.
      'CANTOR'.
      George Cantor.

    • @craigruchman7007
      @craigruchman7007 Рік тому

      @@autumnicleaf Ok, given the cardinality of N is ℵ0, state the cardinalities of Q and R.

    • @jacobjones5269
      @jacobjones5269 Рік тому +1

      The real truth is the human brain cannot grasp the concept of infinity, which is why everyone including Cantor went stark raving mad trying to do so over the last 2500 years.. I’m not saying you can’t have some contextual knowledge, but we will never understand it.. And it’s not because it doesn’t exist..

  • @nikkiyost3386
    @nikkiyost3386 8 років тому +544

    "Infinity is not a number, it is a fish." 0:15

    • @pgn42
      @pgn42 6 років тому +13

      Connor Yost that’s exactly what I was thinking!

    • @charlieob1358
      @charlieob1358 6 років тому

      Connor Yost I

    • @ramadavince6611
      @ramadavince6611 6 років тому

      Connor Yost fish live in water not on paper(if you take it like this)

    • @ritustatus2540
      @ritustatus2540 6 років тому +2

      😂😂😁

    • @AbhishekKrSingh-gp4hx
      @AbhishekKrSingh-gp4hx 6 років тому +2

      But you can catch fish not infinity.

  • @dimitrisbekiaris5543
    @dimitrisbekiaris5543 9 років тому +108

    Here is a mindblowing fact for you: No one number has an exact previous number or an exact number after. For example 3 can not have a previous number because the decimals never end. 2.999... cannot be one either because you cannot put a number bettween 3 and 2.999... so 2.999... is 3 written in a different way. Also 3 does not have a number after it because 3.000... continues to infinity and as a result you can not put 1 nowhere.

    • @TimofAwsome
      @TimofAwsome 9 років тому +27

      Dimitris Bekiaris To make this idea a bit more solid, assume there is a number X that comes right after 3. Then S = (3+X)/2 is also a number, but S is between 3 and X, a contradiction.

    • @Stroheim333
      @Stroheim333 9 років тому +1

      Dimitris Bekiaris There is something irrational in the use of numbers. After what I know, Gödel's incompleteness theorem is only valid when counting with numbers; pure logical mathematic systems can be complete, but are also very hard to do advanced maths with. In our reality we only have order, logic, relations, proportions and geometry -- numbers is a construction we use as a help, and they only confuse us when they lead us to incomprehensible things like infinity (which probably not exist in reality, either).

    • @dimitrisbekiaris5543
      @dimitrisbekiaris5543 9 років тому

      If i understand right you say that infinity does not exist but the universe is infinite..

    • @Stroheim333
      @Stroheim333 9 років тому +2

      Dimitris Bekiaris No, the universe is probably not infinite. Probably it don't even going to expand forever, because everything that exist (matter, particles) fall apart and dissolve into vakuum.

    • @oteeec
      @oteeec 9 років тому +1

      Dimitris Bekiaris if you are hesitating about that 2.999... should be followed by 3, i have a nice tip (or proof as you will) for you : lets do some simple math --> 2.999...=x ---> lets make another equation like previous one, but ten times bigger ---> 29.999...=10x ---> lets substract the smaller one from the bigger one ---> 27=9x ---> x=3 ---> from the original statement we get ---> 2.999=3 Also you can do this with every infinite repeating decimals, not only with the 0.333... ones but also with difficult ones, like 0.123123123... only here, you have to multiply by 1000, so the decimals line up and substract without problems. And with this method you can convert every infinite repeating decimal into fraction

  • @negin1812
    @negin1812 4 роки тому +46

    Oh reeeallly liked how he came up with proving its incountable. This is a true beauty of math

    • @nilsdula7693
      @nilsdula7693 3 роки тому +1

      Negin ? Me too. I just smiled for 5 minutes after that

    • @sadkritx6200
      @sadkritx6200 3 роки тому +1

      @@nilsdula7693 yeah I also thought it's a really beautiful proof. But the fact that no one believed him and put him in mental institutions is really sad

    • @barryallen8307
      @barryallen8307 2 роки тому

      This just something absurd

  • @alpheusmadsen8485
    @alpheusmadsen8485 4 роки тому +150

    I like the idea of calling things "listable" instead of "countable". I have spent some time trying to come up with better names for things than the original names we've given them. In particular, I've tried re-naming "real", "imaginary", and "complex" -- and I've even come to realize these aren't even "names" (we always talk about "an integer" or "a fraction" but never really "a real" or "an imaginary" or "a complex"). It's a *lot* harder than it looks!

    • @masterblaster3483
      @masterblaster3483 Рік тому +1

      Bruh

    • @LAMarshall
      @LAMarshall Рік тому +11

      Yep, they're not *names* because "real", "imaginary", and "complex" aren't nouns; they're adjectives, meaning they are *descriptions* of nouns. The noun described being "numbers". Try not to think about that too deeply, it's just how grammar works. 😅

    • @Neme112
      @Neme112 Рік тому +7

      Something being an adjective doesn't mean it's not a name. By that logic, the Dominican Republic isn't a name because it's an adjective + a noun and we don't say the adjective on its own. Or even United States isn't a name then because we don't just say "United" on its own and it has to be with the noun. That's nonsense. Names don't have to be nouns. Names can be noun phrases as well, including adjective+noun.

    • @firstnamelastname8790
      @firstnamelastname8790 Рік тому +9

      When he listed the integers in the video, did you notice what he was doing as he listed them? He was counting...
      They are "countable" because you can always count them forever, just like you can list them forever

    • @una-mura
      @una-mura 7 місяців тому

      ​@@LAMarshallthis is numberphile, not letterphile
      (sorry, couldn't miss that one)

  • @TN-pj5lk
    @TN-pj5lk 9 років тому +261

    Interesting, I've heard of this before.
    There are more numbers between 1 and 10 than between 1 and 2, but they are both infinity.

    • @TimofAwsome
      @TimofAwsome 9 років тому +43

      31T3 1337 N008 The set of real/rational numbers between 1 and 10 has the same number of elements as the set of real/rational numbers between 1 and 2.

    • @TN-pj5lk
      @TN-pj5lk 9 років тому +9

      TimofAwsome Clearly not, as the set of reals between 1-10 encompasses every number in the set from 1-2, plus more.

    • @TimofAwsome
      @TimofAwsome 9 років тому +39

      The fact that the set of reals between 1 and 2 is a proper subset of the set of reals between 1 and 10 does not mean the have different cardinalities. Any interval of real numbers has the same number of elements as the entire set of real numbers.

    • @TN-pj5lk
      @TN-pj5lk 9 років тому +4

      TimofAwsome Oh turns out you're right :\
      But how would you prove that each interval on the reals is bijective?

    • @TimofAwsome
      @TimofAwsome 9 років тому +8

      f: R --> (b,a+b) where f(x) = a/(1+e^x) + b is a bijection between the reals and (b,a+b) (you'd have to modify the codomain if a is negative as then a+b would be smaller than b). But this is a bijection between R and an (open) interval.

  • @pauloroberto1459
    @pauloroberto1459 5 років тому +982

    10 points to Gryffindor, Mr. Weasley.

  • @shady8045
    @shady8045 3 роки тому +38

    poor Cantor ;-; thats really depressing, at least his story had a happy ending though even if it was after his death

  • @larsvanzutphen9095
    @larsvanzutphen9095 3 роки тому +100

    0:13 “infinity is not a number” no it’s a fish :D

  • @user-wu7ug4ly3v
    @user-wu7ug4ly3v 7 років тому +1586

    0:33 "What's the biggest number I can think of?" Answer = -1/12

    • @mercronniel3122
      @mercronniel3122 7 років тому +177

      I see what you did there.

    • @user-wu7ug4ly3v
      @user-wu7ug4ly3v 7 років тому +33

      :D

    • @usfghost
      @usfghost 7 років тому +64

      Clever... Very clever...

    • @tenacious645
      @tenacious645 7 років тому +23

      I don't know why I found that so funny hahaha

    • @repletesphinx21
      @repletesphinx21 7 років тому +11

      pi. 3.14159265358979... < that's all I know from the top of my head lol

  • @stevevansteenbrugge8978
    @stevevansteenbrugge8978 8 років тому +3679

    You want to know what's also bigger than you think?
    Your belief that this was going to be sexual.

  • @barsozuguler4744
    @barsozuguler4744 4 роки тому +58

    Human: *finds infinity
    Also humans: *trying to count it with every possible way

  • @diskritis2076
    @diskritis2076 4 роки тому +69

    The fault in our stars:
    "Some infinities are bigger than other infinities"

    • @shalom2092
      @shalom2092 4 роки тому +1

      I also thought of that

    • @loganm2924
      @loganm2924 3 роки тому +1

      I’m not crying, you’re crying

    • @alphaecho3875
      @alphaecho3875 3 роки тому

      Sorry but what do you mean?

    • @diskritis2076
      @diskritis2076 3 роки тому

      @@alphaecho3875 you have to read the book to understand

    • @666miyuru
      @666miyuru 3 роки тому +1

      @@alphaecho3875 Imagine the amount of decimals you could list between the numbers 1 and 2 that would be infinite right? of course. Now imagine the amount of decimals between 1 and 3 that would also be an infinite number. So the infinite decimals between 1 and 3 are greater than the ones between 1 and 2 but both are infinite numbers therefore making one infinity larger than the other.

  • @MrsRen
    @MrsRen 10 років тому +33

    I was talking to my intro to microeconomics professor after class and she was saying how I got a bit ahead of the class by realizing the significance of 1 in relation to elasticity of demand and then told me that next class we'll touch on trying to explain what infinity means and I was like "Yeah, and nobody understands infinity. Not even most math students really understand infinity. It's a direction, not a number." One of the accounting professors was nearby and he chimed in "Yeah, and some infinities are bigger than others so it gets even more confusing."
    And that is how I came to watch this video again.

  • @sirbillius
    @sirbillius 7 років тому +250

    The first time he drew the infinity symbol I immediately thought, "That's a fish..."

  • @karriliikkanen
    @karriliikkanen 3 роки тому +12

    His hand is almost bleeding from writing so many numbers. I love this guy!

    • @Janken_Pro
      @Janken_Pro Рік тому +1

      I thought they were marker stains

    • @karriliikkanen
      @karriliikkanen Рік тому

      @@Janken_Pro it is only your mind trying to protect you from reality.

  • @Subpar1224
    @Subpar1224 4 роки тому +42

    I have always loved the concept of countable infinity. It is a math concept that truly does make sense and also is something many people don't know but can be described easily enough

    • @DrWhom
      @DrWhom 2 роки тому

      Many crackpots have baulked at the idea of "more than" countable infinity, and many more will do so. It is not hard to see why: it is the intuitive concept of "more" that really breaks down. We mathematicians perceive that 1:1 pairing is a much more fundamental concept than is counting itself, and we are comfortable extending it to deal with the transfinite. But if one cleaves to everyday ideas of size, bigger-than-ness, and so on, this area of maths just seems very strange.

    • @Zelchinho
      @Zelchinho Рік тому +2

      But the concept of countable infinity isnt real. Because u cant do it. Also, he said that 1 infinity can be bigger than the other. How does that make any sense? It does make sense on paper as was shown, but how does that not contradict infinity?

    • @aymericletiec-gimbert3408
      @aymericletiec-gimbert3408 11 місяців тому +2

      @@Zelchinho The concept of countable infinity is real. The mathematical definition for a set of numbers to be countable infinite is hinted at in the video, which is that the set of numbers is in bijection with N, the set of of non negative integers. (ie there exists a function from the set to N with a one-to-one correspondence). When we say that uncountable infinite sets are "bigger" than these countable infinite sets, there is no real "proof" or mathematical sense to that (to my knowledge) but is purely based on a intuitive/logical viewpoint.

    • @leohe2594
      @leohe2594 6 місяців тому

      ​@@Zelchinhocountable infinity means that you cna find a way to associate each natural integer (0,1,2...) to an element on the set (this association is known as surjection). If all elements of the set can be countable (using mathematical logic, there's a reason the quantificators exists), it is countable
      Rela numbers are uncountable because there exists no such association (surjection)

  • @backyard282
    @backyard282 7 років тому +276

    James's voice and way of talking is so viewer-boosting

    • @sparhopper
      @sparhopper 6 років тому +4

      It's demeaning.
      It's like he's talking to a 4 year old.

    • @slightlygayindianscammer2279
      @slightlygayindianscammer2279 6 років тому

      Shut up

    • @Ryeubaham
      @Ryeubaham 5 років тому +5

      @@sparhopper einstein said: if you cant explain it simply, you do not know it well enough

    • @linus6718
      @linus6718 4 роки тому +1

      @@sparhopper If you interpreted it that way, then perhaps you do have the mind of a 4 year old

  • @AnythingMachine
    @AnythingMachine 5 років тому +520

    Some numbers are so big that you can't stop counting them. But others are so big that you can't START

    • @FistroMan
      @FistroMan 5 років тому +4

      I have started... and I have finished TWICE. The funy thing is: it's a true history. so.. Math becomes myself into a clone of Chuck norris.

    • @willeemina
      @willeemina 5 років тому +1

      not

    • @FistroMan
      @FistroMan 5 років тому +2

      @@willeemina Wait until see my math circular kicks...

    • @hybmnzz2658
      @hybmnzz2658 4 роки тому

      Sets of numbers*

    • @davidkonevky7372
      @davidkonevky7372 3 роки тому

      Yes, if you want to count from betwen 0 to 1, how many digits do you need? how many infinite combinations are on an infinite digit number? it must be a lot

  • @dimmingstar
    @dimmingstar 10 місяців тому +7

    Cantor's work on infinities is one of my favourite topics ever, where learning about them expanded my mind in a way I could never forget~ he's an absolute genius, and although this happened ages ago I'm still so angered at the discrimination and injustice he dealt with from his peers and society ..I hope he still found peace, in the end.
    thanks Numberphile, for the passionate explanation :)

  • @RabidHobbit
    @RabidHobbit 4 роки тому +79

    "Some infinities can't be counted" -- Georg "Count-or"

    • @SteveCarras
      @SteveCarras 4 роки тому +2

      Georg Cantor, not to be confused with legendary ubber-falsetto-voiced vaudevillian Eddie Cantor (1892-1964).

    • @mysticwine
      @mysticwine 4 роки тому

      There's only one infinity

    • @12jswilson
      @12jswilson 3 роки тому

      @@mysticwine there's actually infinite cardinalities of infinity.

    • @mysticwine
      @mysticwine 3 роки тому

      @@12jswilson What's a cardinalitie?

    • @12jswilson
      @12jswilson 3 роки тому

      @@mysticwine cardinality is the size of a set. For finite sets, it's easy. It's the number of objects. For infinite sets, it's more tricky but we say they have the same cardinality if and only if there can exist a bijection (1 to 1 correspondence) between the set. It's in this way that mathematicians say some infinities are bigger than others. Because there isn't a 1-1 correspondence from the real numbers to the natural numbers, we say there are "more" real numbers than natural numbers.

  • @Monkeystaxx
    @Monkeystaxx 10 років тому +105

    I can't take it any more, subscribed.

    • @NoWhereToRun22
      @NoWhereToRun22 7 років тому +5

      over the last two days, i've been going from video to video feeling the same way. I NEED MORE MATH

  • @byakugansharingan3571
    @byakugansharingan3571 8 років тому +755

    1:51 He clearly does a mistake and cuts the video (he forgot to put the negative mark in front of the 4)! YOU CAN'T FOOL ME WITH YOUR SOFT VOICE

    • @samielsayed7445
      @samielsayed7445 8 років тому +13

      Didn't see that lol

    • @fazlulhowladerbibi5377
      @fazlulhowladerbibi5377 8 років тому +28

      +Byakugan Sharing you got him down

    • @DizzIlike
      @DizzIlike 8 років тому +8

      +Byakugan Sharingan Yeah I noticed that too but he doesn't change it. You can see he just put the minus in front of it as it's very close to the comma compared to the other negative numbers he wrote down.

    • @robychampiondaniel9944
      @robychampiondaniel9944 8 років тому +12

      Recent studies demonstrate that 99.99% of The viewers of this video just paused it at minute 1:51 To See if your affermation was right
      PS: I didn't

    • @adomce1996
      @adomce1996 8 років тому +23

      nope man, he lists positives first, then negatives

  • @jeancorriveau8686
    @jeancorriveau8686 4 роки тому +48

    The concept of infinity stimulates the imagination which is what happened to me at the age of 4. I found in my father's garage a tin can with a picture on it. Within that picture was the same picture smaller, within which was the same picture even smaller. This captured my imagination for many days. I realised that I could imagine a series of even smaller pictures. I realised that this series that does not end, yet, I did not realise that it leads to infinity. Then I studied Cantor's discoveries of infinities at the university 16 years later. I was in awe.

    • @davidwest7299
      @davidwest7299 3 роки тому

      Sir, please don't train young minds to wander too much or too far. The human mind has nothing to do with graciousness or mercy or love.

    • @jeancorriveau8686
      @jeancorriveau8686 3 роки тому +10

      @@davidwest7299 Love? Are you sure your comment is in response to my comment?

    • @lawrencedoliveiro9104
      @lawrencedoliveiro9104 3 роки тому +1

      Fractals seem like a very convincing illustration of infinity within a finite space.

    • @jeancorriveau8686
      @jeancorriveau8686 3 роки тому +2

      @@lawrencedoliveiro9104 Indeed. In our minds only. Physically, infinity doesn't exist otherwise any region of space would be of finite energy.

  • @rawdog42
    @rawdog42 4 роки тому +246

    Chuck Norris counted to Infinity.
    Twice.

    • @loganm2924
      @loganm2924 4 роки тому +19

      Ordinal infinity or Cardinal infinity. Or one of the many other variants of infinity. Assuming ordinal infinity as otherwise you couldn’t count it twice. And therefore he not only counted to infinity twice, but also three times and 100 times and infinity times.
      Chuck Norris counted to Infinity.
      Infinity times.

    • @rawdog42
      @rawdog42 4 роки тому +1

      @@loganm2924 Awesome.

    • @icantth1nkofanam40
      @icantth1nkofanam40 4 роки тому +1

      @@loganm2924 twice

    • @kingsman428
      @kingsman428 4 роки тому +3

      @@loganm2924 *"...Chuck Norris counted to infinity...."*
      And found Bruce Lee waiting for him and he said to Chuck *"...What was that?..."*

    • @daddy_richards
      @daddy_richards 4 роки тому

      Logan McDonald are you the maker of true infinity? Are you Reinhardt-C?

  • @khulhucthulhu9952
    @khulhucthulhu9952 7 років тому +517

    why do I feel like a 7 year old child whilst watching this video?

    • @jimbig3997
      @jimbig3997 7 років тому +4

      That's funny. Me too!

    • @suwinkhamchaiwong8382
      @suwinkhamchaiwong8382 7 років тому +11

      Khulhu Cthulhu same. I'm actually seven

    • @anrubis3031
      @anrubis3031 7 років тому +20

      I am 5

    • @tarunkalra3495
      @tarunkalra3495 7 років тому +21

      Khulhu Cthulhu yeah thn i m not evn born

    • @wellguesswhatIthink
      @wellguesswhatIthink 6 років тому +4

      Because he's a young, smart guy and you don't want to feel lectured by him? Old fart

  • @spiderous
    @spiderous 7 років тому +954

    It's easy - infinity is an eight number written horizontally.

    • @ZonkoKongo
      @ZonkoKongo 7 років тому +32

      -8i

    • @MemerCat0
      @MemerCat0 7 років тому +6

      Interferencyjny infin8y

    • @artificialintelligence9378
      @artificialintelligence9378 7 років тому +41

      you could've put it in a better way, as in infinity is a sleeping 8

    • @vorpal22
      @vorpal22 6 років тому +6

      Infinity is what happens when 8 drinks a bottle of tequila.

    • @ChinnuWoW
      @ChinnuWoW 6 років тому +1

      How do you know it's horizontal? Why not vertical? What it actually is, is 90 degrees rotated.

  • @jayDClo
    @jayDClo 4 роки тому +17

    “How long have we got?” So quick and subtle but so hilarious.

  • @dasmartretard
    @dasmartretard 4 роки тому +9

    i learned them as countable as well, but my favorite word for them that i came across was "enumerable"

  • @jupiterlegrand4817
    @jupiterlegrand4817 5 років тому +201

    Not enough tight close-ups.

    • @karmpuscookie
      @karmpuscookie 5 років тому +2

      Help me-this hurts

    • @michaelerickson985
      @michaelerickson985 3 роки тому

      Respectfully, I disagree. I contend that there are too many close-ups and that the cinematic quality would improve if they added more medium shots to the mix.

    • @siritio3553
      @siritio3553 2 роки тому

      @@michaelerickson985 Either this channel has more than average number of trolls, or more than average number of people completely incapable of understanding the notion of a joke. I bet on the second

  • @AJoe-ze6go
    @AJoe-ze6go 8 років тому +299

    I prefer not to use terms like "bigger" when referring to infinities, since "big" implies a size - something infinities don't have by definition, being endless.
    Rather, I think of some infinities as being "denser" than others.

    • @KaelynWillingham
      @KaelynWillingham 8 років тому +15

      I agree with this wholeheartedly. Think of infinity as a measure of density rather than a measure of size.

    • @rajeshgupta1055
      @rajeshgupta1055 8 років тому +2

      i also completely agree with u

    • @NoriMori1992
      @NoriMori1992 8 років тому +7

      +A. Joe Technically very true. As Vsauce explains, the list of whole numbers isn't "twice as big" as the list of even numbers - it's just denser.

    • @Nukestarmaster
      @Nukestarmaster 8 років тому +13

      +NoriMori The whole numbers are twice as dense as the even numbers, but they are both the same size, a countable infinity. Using density isn't really helpful, especially considering that the reals are (uncountably) infinitely more dense than the rationals which are (countably) infinitely more dense than the integers which are infinitely (still countable) more dense than the squares of integers and so on. Density means nothing in infinities, size is a much better determining factor.

    • @AJoe-ze6go
      @AJoe-ze6go 8 років тому +1

      Nukestarmaster But as you pointed out, if you only consider size, you wouldn't understand a key difference between - for example - the whole numbers and the even numbers.
      Perhaps both have their uses.

  • @MRATtasa
    @MRATtasa 2 роки тому +8

    You simply explain the idea of real analysis in such great way! So fun 😍

  • @bbk2802
    @bbk2802 Рік тому +15

    I was recently watching a video explaining why the speed of light is what it is. According to some physicists this existence has a limiter. They said light could go even faster than it does but the universe prevents it so in regards to infinity there may a realistic limiter to it. I wish someone would touch on this subject! If not I’ll have to become a brainiac and do it myself 😢

    • @MuffinsAPlenty
      @MuffinsAPlenty Рік тому +1

      I don't know too many people who believe anything infinite can exist within the universe. Nevertheless, we can do mathematics with infinite sets and various concepts of infinity.
      If you have a philosophy of mathematics where math actually exists in some metaphysical sense, then you might be concerned by this. Maybe dealing with infinity in math is wrong! There is nothing in the universe which is infinite, so how do we know we're correct about it in math? This isn't a death knell to the philosophy. One can believe that the concept of infinite things still is a valid concept and we can abstractly work with it even if nothing *physically infinite* exists.
      But there are other philosophies of mathematics. Things like antirealism, where mathematics is seen not as a thing which actually exists in a metaphysical sense, but more of as a useful fiction which we might or might not use as a tool or which we might view as beautiful like art or intellectually stimulating like philosophy. There is certainly utility to some mathematics of the "infinite" under such a philosophy - some statements about an infinite set simultaneously encode infinitely many statements about finite sets and thus reduce the amount of work we must do to express those infinite families of statements. And some may just be for beauty and a desire to speculate.

    • @anamay01
      @anamay01 Рік тому

      ​@@MuffinsAPlenty Would space being "dense": any non-zero length can be divided into strictly smaller lengths, imply the 'physical existence' of infinite things? It kind of does to me, because then any *exact* representation of the universe would require infinite precision (countably many numbers/bits).
      At the same time, one may never need the full exact representation. We could always work with an approximation that suits our purpose (as we do with pi, e, etc.). It would be interesting to find out if it is possible to set up an experiment which determines if space is dense in the above sense; or even rule such an experiment out (which would make the question unscientific...?).

  • @narata1541
    @narata1541 7 років тому +329

    I remember reading online that only one person (so far) counted to infinity, and that was Chuck Norris. In fact, he did it twice.

    • @aniruddhnaganur1393
      @aniruddhnaganur1393 7 років тому +4

      how's that possible

    • @narata1541
      @narata1541 7 років тому +42

      +Aniruddh Naganur It's an old joke where people would say that Chuck Norris could do anything. When I saw this video, I couldn't resist saying this joke.

    • @ionlyusepics
      @ionlyusepics 7 років тому +17

      Narata only true UA-cam users remember the classic chuck jokes:)

    • @nielsunnerup7099
      @nielsunnerup7099 7 років тому +55

      I heard he did it a third time, but this time he started from infinity and counted backwards to 1

    • @blablaca2816
      @blablaca2816 7 років тому +12

      Niels Unnerup Next time he'll start from infinity to negative infinity...

  • @kallelellacevej2234
    @kallelellacevej2234 5 років тому +191

    0:33 "Oooo it's 20." I laughed so hard at that probably since it's so true. 😅

    • @MarkSmith-tu9qr
      @MarkSmith-tu9qr 4 роки тому +1

      😂

    • @tsawy6
      @tsawy6 4 роки тому +9

      Two old men have a contest, to see who can come up with the bigger number. The first man deliberates long and hard, before he starts, and with a knowing smile proclaims: "78".
      The second man smiles and nods, defeated.

    • @Zahid__mughal682
      @Zahid__mughal682 3 роки тому +3

      @@tsawy6 WHAT?!?

    • @barritoothy
      @barritoothy 3 роки тому +2

      @@tsawy6 what dat mean?

    • @pot8os
      @pot8os 3 роки тому +1

      @@barritoothy i think because of age and that they feel old and it took a long time to get there.
      If you are old you will probably think of your age first.

  • @dollishsilverdreams
    @dollishsilverdreams 6 місяців тому +5

    I absolutely love this channel !! The passions of those mathematicians radiating through each video is something so inspirational; thank you for this amazing content!

  • @jackroutledge352
    @jackroutledge352 4 роки тому +8

    It’s funny that this was so widely rejected at the time. To me, this is one of the most intuitive things I’ve seen in this channel, and so clearly true.

  • @neilmcmahon
    @neilmcmahon 9 років тому +111

    Why not just use a white board instead of wasting all that paper.

    • @Macgki
      @Macgki 9 років тому +105

      They're sold on ebay to raise money for charity :)

    • @Numlocq
      @Numlocq 9 років тому +11

      Neil McMahon Hippy.

    • @bullseyekiller8909
      @bullseyekiller8909 9 років тому +3

      edadou lol

    • @neilmcmahon
      @neilmcmahon 9 років тому

      Ed Gein Noticed by Ed Gein, I feel so special..

    • @neilmcmahon
      @neilmcmahon 9 років тому

      Andy Merrett Maybe the best system from a bad lot.

  • @CRAZYMAN-su8sg
    @CRAZYMAN-su8sg 8 років тому +578

    how did i end up here i started from sneaker collections

    • @Dan-fo8ez
      @Dan-fo8ez 8 років тому +59

      Sneakers are costing so much nowadays that they are raising the price to infinity

    • @keitra666
      @keitra666 8 років тому +9

      I got here by a video how much you click on your keyboard and the fun was, When you click space 600, 000 peoples do that at the same time you do

    • @himegototrap4life568
      @himegototrap4life568 8 років тому

      XD

    • @josuadavidsson9903
      @josuadavidsson9903 8 років тому +1

      You've probably watched similar videos so it got recommended

    • @ecyor0
      @ecyor0 8 років тому +4

      +Alpha XenoGenesis (TBNR) I got here from the Rogue One trailer, funnily enough.

  • @rabidbigdog
    @rabidbigdog 2 роки тому +3

    You may think it's a long way down to the shops, but Infinity is big, really big ...

  • @Totto3
    @Totto3 4 роки тому +29

    The title should be.. *"To infinity and beyond"*

  • @rustyb4nana
    @rustyb4nana 8 років тому +624

    Sponsored by the fault in our stars

    • @rustyb4nana
      @rustyb4nana 8 років тому +14

      +Vic Pownall yeah, there is a running theme in the book about 'some infinities being larger than other infinities' relating to how an infinity of love between two people with cancer isnt as long as it would be if they didnt have cancer, but it is still an infinity. Or something like that, tbh i didnt pay much attention while watching it

    • @krn-in2tv
      @krn-in2tv 8 років тому +2

      XDDDDDDDDD you won

    • @envella
      @envella 8 років тому +1

      +Karim Shoaib When I heard that I was thinking TFIOS

    • @envella
      @envella 8 років тому

      Kane Bell That was kind of rude...

    • @nishkaarora6343
      @nishkaarora6343 8 років тому

      +Karim Shoaib best comment ever

  • @taylorkintigh7170
    @taylorkintigh7170 7 років тому +40

    This type of concept is called the cardinality of the set. It's something you learn in real analysis, modern/abstract algebra and other courses that deal with numerical concepts.

    • @joeyhardin5903
      @joeyhardin5903 7 років тому +36

      And Vsauce

    • @tay_piss_saucer_mk.400
      @tay_piss_saucer_mk.400 5 років тому +1

      Its Cantor Set , cardinality = aleph-0

    • @dhkatz_
      @dhkatz_ 5 років тому +4

      You learn it in any discrete mathematics class.

    • @kingarth0r
      @kingarth0r 2 роки тому +2

      @@tay_piss_saucer_mk.400 no no no. The cantor set is actually uncountable because it contains all binary numbers which is uncountable.

  • @tru_710
    @tru_710 3 роки тому +7

    RIP Cantor.
    I want a list of all the people that were ahead of their time but treated badly while they were still alive.

  • @doodlepoodleyt6180
    @doodlepoodleyt6180 4 роки тому +9

    guys based on research 80% of comments are random, and 20% is actually about the vid

  • @hh8302k
    @hh8302k 9 років тому +123

    So what they're saying is that there is an infinite type of infinities?

    • @Zikmarc
      @Zikmarc 9 років тому +16

      Yes YoshiFace.
      Cantor, that did all that demonstration and created what is known as the set theory, demonstrated that there are infinities of infinity and that concept is really not a concept, it's the simplest part of what he did.
      Let make things clear first... it's difficult to talk about infinity when we misuse the vocabulary.
      "infinity" is the concept of infinity
      "cardinal" is the "number" of element(s) of a set
      "infinity" can also designate an "infinite number", they are called by Cantor (I think it's him) : transfinite numbers.
      Your question then being :
      "Is the cardinal of the set of transfinite number infinite ?"
      ... again, the answer is yes.
      Cantor proved that if you have a set A, infinite or not, the magnitude of the cardinal of the set P constituted of the "parts" of A, is a magnitude higher than the cardinal of A.
      Intuitively, we can write that card(A) < card(P)
      But you must understand what it means when A and P are infinite sets...
      In the case of A being an infinite set, its cardinal is a transfinite number. And Cantor proved that you cannot match all the elements of P uniquely with an element of A.
      Thus, cardinal of P is higher (bigger) than cardinal of A.
      Now, that's the beauty of math : you can continue infinitely with the P again, and construct the set constituted of parts of P. That set will then be of a cardinal bigger that the cardinal of P itself.
      You can then start with the set A0 being the set of all natural number of size aleph-zero (the first transfinite number) and build a list of transfinite numbers :
      {A0, A1, A2, A3, ...} with :
      A1 = the set of parts of A0
      A2 = the set of parts of A1
      ...
      and that construction has no end itself
      and each A* is a transfinite number different (higher) that the ones before it
      Thus, there are infinite number of "infinites" (= transfinite numbers).
      (sorry if I'm wrong about the name "transfinite number" and also about the construction of the sets using the "set of parts"... maybe it's an other construction Cantor used. But the idea is that one, roughly.)
      Have fun ^_^

    • @joshuahaber9457
      @joshuahaber9457 9 років тому +3

      Though true, this particular proof only shows 2 types of infinities.

    • @nielsjan9076
      @nielsjan9076 9 років тому

      Actually I don't agree with this concept. For example: The infinity of integers is the same size as the infinity of decimal types. It might be slightly filosofical, but I compare it to the speed of light.
      Something that has the twice the speed of light is as fast as something that has once the speed of light, there are a couple of reasons for thing which are hard to comprehend in the accepted system we use in our society, but with infinite numbers it's the same in my opinion.
      A infinite amount of integers can go on forever, so can a infinite amount of decimals, therefor they are the same.

    • @Zikmarc
      @Zikmarc 9 років тому +1

      Niels Jan van de Pol> you cannot say "an infinite amount of integers can go on forever, so can an infinite amount of decimals" and the conclude that "THEY are the SAME".
      No, there is logical implication there... you have to proove what you say.
      And indeed Cantor proove that there are at least two "size" of infinities... and in fact there are an infinite size of infinities also.
      But all infinities, however "small" they can be "goes on forever" by "definition" ^_^

    • @mikeya2384
      @mikeya2384 9 років тому +2

      Marc Ly I think people are just getting confused by what the word "bigger" actually means in this video. Just think of the "bigger infinities" as 'encompassing' more dimension. for example: one line that looks like this - is smaller than two lines that intersect like this + but all lines go on for ever in each direction in both cases. The smaller case takes in to account left and right while the other has left and right but also up and down.

  • @CSS567
    @CSS567 10 років тому +50

    That first infinity looks like a fish.

  • @Zeverinsen
    @Zeverinsen 4 роки тому +1

    I'm glad Georg got recognised in the end 😢
    A video about math with the ups and downs of a great drama!

  • @rangaroo6385
    @rangaroo6385 4 роки тому +12

    I struggled with understanding math concepts and prime/integers/rational numbers etc in high school, until today in my 30s it dawned on me that there were infinite numbers between 0 and 1. And all of a sudden my brain understood and watching these videos made so much sense. Why am I such a late learner 🤦

    • @word6344
      @word6344 10 місяців тому +2

      Everyone learns at their own pace, don't worry about it

    • @finnnaginnn
      @finnnaginnn 9 місяців тому +2

      I'm a teenager and I don't know how to socialise properly, while my peers pull it off gracefully

  • @Jose-Vargas
    @Jose-Vargas 10 років тому +55

    0:15 that's no infinity (car) ... That's a fish

  • @gersang663322
    @gersang663322 5 років тому +534

    Why am I watching this at 2am

  • @gunner678
    @gunner678 4 роки тому +2

    Infinite infinity.......absolutely superb video. A great mix of practical demonstration and historical detail presented in an interesting and engaging way! Well done infinity......................................

  • @philiplamoureux8951
    @philiplamoureux8951 3 роки тому

    Now he’s on Numberphile, THE GREATEST ACCOLADE OF ALL! Well done!

  • @xooperz
    @xooperz 9 років тому +692

    There is infinity between every single decimal, e.g. 0,13209832 and 0,13209833

    • @ciCCapROSTi
      @ciCCapROSTi 8 років тому +35

      xooperz FBF that's true for rational numbers as well. that's not the difference between reals and rationals.

    • @orenmaximov924
      @orenmaximov924 8 років тому +4

      +xooperz that's not to say that there isn't a bijection between those two numbers and the real numbers. there's a bijection between any two real numbers and the set of all real numbers

    • @chicathechicken8546
      @chicathechicken8546 8 років тому +9

      That's a comma...

    • @xooperz
      @xooperz 8 років тому

      Chica the Chicken What?? What are you talking about?

    • @chicathechicken8546
      @chicathechicken8546 8 років тому

      +xooperz Oh...never mind, just saw it. Sorry to cause trouble...😵

  • @yoliz562
    @yoliz562 6 років тому +18

    I first watched this video when I was in high school and now I'm in university studying cardinality in my math course. It feels amazing.

    • @jkgan4952
      @jkgan4952 3 роки тому

      And now?

    • @sparshruhela8584
      @sparshruhela8584 2 роки тому

      Hey I want to delve deep into this. Can you suggest some textbook to get the feel of it :)

  • @sebas2001ify
    @sebas2001ify Рік тому

    I watched this in high school for fun like 6 years ago now I'm in uni having to learn this and its very intuitive thank you Dr James Grime

    • @matthewphilip1977
      @matthewphilip1977 Рік тому

      For every natural number there are two related integers. The set of integers seems therefore twice as large as the set of natural numbers. But if there is an infinite number of natural numbers, and you can't have more than an infinite number of something, then there can't be more integers than there are natural numbers. There can only be more integers than natural numbers when we're talking about the finite. For example, if we have a trillion natural numbers, there are 2 trillion related integers ( for 1 there is 1 and -1, for 2 there is 2 and -2, etc). What does this tell us? That we pay too much respect to the idea of infinity? That it is a mere idea, a mere concept, that it's not real?

  • @249pro6
    @249pro6 2 роки тому +1

    This is the first numberphile video I watched and now I love numberphile 😀

  • @johnytest464
    @johnytest464 7 років тому +75

    "It's a big topic" woh, them puns...

    • @civilegr
      @civilegr 7 років тому

      johnytest464

    • @joshuatheawesome9440
      @joshuatheawesome9440 7 років тому +2

      A-THE- 1ST
      Define space and define the universe. That will make your question answerable.

    • @enderallygolem
      @enderallygolem 6 років тому

      They came at the same time...?

  • @alexandreman8601
    @alexandreman8601 7 років тому +100

    0:12 Is it a fish?

    • @budesmatpicu3992
      @budesmatpicu3992 5 років тому +4

      because there is something fishy with the very concept of infinity (not the potential one, but the REAL one)

  • @abeastgaming9600
    @abeastgaming9600 4 роки тому +118

    Well you know what’s bigger,
    Infinity+1
    Edit: it’s a joke, jokes are supposed to be understood. But you people don’t understand this

    • @aldobernaltvbernal8745
      @aldobernaltvbernal8745 4 роки тому +20

      ∞ + 1 = ∞
      :>

    • @sstrick500
      @sstrick500 4 роки тому +1

      You can't triple stamp a double stamp!

    • @mysticwine
      @mysticwine 4 роки тому +7

      I don't think so. You are implying that infinity ends.

    • @mysticwine
      @mysticwine 4 роки тому +1

      You could say, I have a number so big that it is infinite, because you can always add 1 to it.

    • @MrSchivy
      @MrSchivy 4 роки тому +3

      You can actually do that. Check the Vsauce video on "How to count past infinity".

  • @VernePhilleas
    @VernePhilleas 3 роки тому +2

    Great vid! Thanks expanding the decimal distances of irrationals and rationals to infinite!

  • @JoshWerner1
    @JoshWerner1 8 років тому +30

    at 1:23 it shows 1, 2, 3 on the paper...woahh

    • @gmann8659
      @gmann8659 6 років тому +6

      Josh Werner that's actually more interesting than this video

    • @blaze-pn6fk
      @blaze-pn6fk 6 років тому +2

      your observation tho

    • @gianniermini5484
      @gianniermini5484 6 років тому +4

      Math illuminati confirmed

  • @timewasteland
    @timewasteland 10 років тому +16

    “You can divide infinity an infinite number of times, and the resulting pieces will still be infinitely large. But if you divide a non-infinite number an infinite number of times the resulting pieces are non-infinitely small. Since they are non-infinitely small, but there are an infinite number of them, if you add them back together, their sum is infinite. This implies any number is, in fact, infinite.” - Uresh, character from The Wise Man's Fear by Patrick Rothfuss ^^

    • @omp199
      @omp199 10 років тому +2

      timewasteland Except that that's nonsense.

    • @timewasteland
      @timewasteland 10 років тому +2

      Bon't blame me, Blame the author of the book the quote is from. Math was never my thing, anyway.

    • @Snubbeniskrubben
      @Snubbeniskrubben 10 років тому

      I haven't read that kind of nonsense since I was 6 years old.

    • @12321dantheman
      @12321dantheman 10 років тому

      'If you divide a non infinite number an infinite number of times the result isn't infinitely small'- simply not true. 1/infinity =0

    • @glootech
      @glootech 10 років тому +1

      That man clearly did not grasp the idea of a limit.

  • @adityamishra7711
    @adityamishra7711 2 роки тому +1

    Finally, the great Cantor, got mentioned in numberphile, his soul must be in peace now...

  • @haneulkim4902
    @haneulkim4902 Рік тому +3

    Simply amazing! Thanks for great content!!!

  • @bextract0
    @bextract0 5 років тому +11

    The way he said "There are different kinds of infinity" killed me 0:51

  • @justjit6466
    @justjit6466 6 років тому +451

    Now, we are having a war on Infinity, *Infinity War* .

    • @yto6095
      @yto6095 5 років тому +10

      when you get to the Berkeley cardinal: we're in endgame now

    • @NathanielCoran
      @NathanielCoran 4 роки тому

      Hey what does this mean I don't get it

    • @andrewgrebenisan6141
      @andrewgrebenisan6141 4 роки тому

      @@NathanielCoran Avengers Infinity War

    • @NathanielCoran
      @NathanielCoran 4 роки тому

      @@andrewgrebenisan6141 Yeah what's that?

    • @gunukulanaren2957
      @gunukulanaren2957 4 роки тому

      endame is -1/12 lol is it

  • @crazypenguinbob
    @crazypenguinbob 2 роки тому

    I love how all these videos start

  • @dougg1075
    @dougg1075 4 роки тому

    Was watching World Science Festival and came here for a better explanation and got it.. well done.

  • @EasiLeo
    @EasiLeo 8 років тому +54

    That paper looks so damn uncomfortable to write on...

  • @greenwool4460
    @greenwool4460 8 років тому +177

    I'm 5 years old and I'm offended. I can almost count to 30 not 20

  • @sign543
    @sign543 4 роки тому +8

    He looks like a Weasley brother. 👍🏼

  • @stutch4048
    @stutch4048 4 роки тому +3

    I don’t regret watching this with French subtitles

  • @jyeunplugged1
    @jyeunplugged1 7 років тому +198

    I am not a number...I am a free man

    • @glorytheman
      @glorytheman 7 років тому +8

      Nothing to do with the vid but okay.

    • @confusedguy404
      @confusedguy404 7 років тому +2

      +JYE - all hail Lelouch

    • @Walter-Montalvo
      @Walter-Montalvo 6 років тому +1

      Now now, number six...

    • @hellogoodbye7365
      @hellogoodbye7365 6 років тому +1

      That is what every number thinks

    • @hellogoodbye7365
      @hellogoodbye7365 6 років тому

      Its not about the number standing alone numbers are only value when they come together. Same with humans. One human is weak. Alot of humans are strong. We need eachother like numbers do

  • @cosmicpaudel9430
    @cosmicpaudel9430 10 років тому +16

    What about complex/imaginary numbers aren't they a whole new infinity?

  • @jasonpitt6689
    @jasonpitt6689 4 роки тому +1

    The way i interpret this is that the infinities are not bigger or smaller than one another but that some of the counts or lists use more fractions or possibilities (calculations) faster than the others so what we are really talking about is the rate of change of the calculations with the calculator making multiple calculations for the last one at one time while it would only decide on one at a time for the first example.. you could argue that the more complicated one is 'bigger' only in terms of the number of concurrent calculations rather than the size which is still the 'idea' that the size is limitless - the same as the more complicated infinity..

  • @OwlRTA
    @OwlRTA 4 роки тому +32

    how did I get here from Gangnam Style 7 years ago?
    that recommendation changed how I watched UA-cam

  • @bulasking14
    @bulasking14 10 років тому +31

    Just like the idea of zero. How nothing can something be?

  • @WILLIEtheKOYOTE
    @WILLIEtheKOYOTE 9 років тому +263

    I've always wondered how time works with this concept. If you start at 2:45, how can we possibly make it to 2:46. We have to go through the sixty seconds first, and between each of those seconds there's so many milliseconds, and between those, nanoseconds, and so on. So, in order to actually advance in time, we would have to at some point skip forward. Either that or there is a smallest possible unit of time.

    • @TheMrFloorball
      @TheMrFloorball 9 років тому +86

      Actually there is a minimal unit of time, which is called the planck-time. It is the time which you need to cross the minimal unit of distance (planck-lenght) with the fastest velocity possible (lightspeed). But don't trust me too much, better google it ;)

    • @TheMrFloorball
      @TheMrFloorball 9 років тому +1

      Sorry didnt see your comment

    • @OhClarisse
      @OhClarisse 9 років тому +23

      Willie Numbers are not the same as time.
      Time is not numbers, we created numbers and link them with this palpable time units we have in nature to measure the advancing of "time"

    • @TheMrFloorball
      @TheMrFloorball 9 років тому +15

      ***** time is a dimension and how you feel it passing is not how fast time is going

    • @shikhanshu
      @shikhanshu 9 років тому +7

      TheMrFloorball Planck's length and Planck's time are the defining numbers for the highest resolution physically/mathematically possible from what humans know so far. No distance or time can be smaller than those numbers.
      Which doesn't make sense really :D

  • @asmigoyal1075
    @asmigoyal1075 3 роки тому +3

    The first thought I get after watching this channel's videos is that, if they upload a video on 1 April, they can literally be explaining something which does not even exist in the video, and then when u finally understand that they break it to u at the end of the video : IT WAS A PRANK ! 😂😂🤣🤣I mean I would literally fall for that

  • @sean16hall3
    @sean16hall3 Рік тому

    My love for numbers is growing through this channel I think my favorite term is transcendental numbers.

  • @grahamcharnley
    @grahamcharnley 5 років тому +9

    In my maths lessons when I do my Infinity talk, I demonstrate that a set of numbers that is infinitely small has the same number of elements of a set of numbers that is infinitely large.

  • @buenvidanadz1969
    @buenvidanadz1969 5 років тому +6

    I love how this channel talks about the pioneer mathematicians that surface the specific theories that their videos talk about

  • @elopster2676
    @elopster2676 3 роки тому +1

    thanks almost had my head cracked in my math class trying to understand cantors diagonal argument

  • @Rudxain
    @Rudxain Рік тому +3

    7:01 I think a better way to explain it is from the POV of computer science:
    If you coded a Turing Machine to enumerate all Reals, you can always code another TM to enumerate the Reals in such a way that *at least 1 number* in the sequence is different.
    And because the set of algorithms to enumerate Reals is enumerable itself, this means we cannot use an infinite set of algos+TMs to enumerate ALL POSSIBLE Reals

    • @fern_fern_fern
      @fern_fern_fern 4 місяці тому +1

      We can barely understand this, how could we look at it from the POV of computer science. We are all noobs here.

    • @Rudxain
      @Rudxain 4 місяці тому +1

      @@fern_fern_fern true. I couldn't think of a simpler explanation.
      What I was trying to say, is that simply appending more numbers to our generated sequence is "cheating", since we're *modifying the algorithm* to include more numbers, instead of letting it run as usual.
      Even if we defined a complex algorithm to enumerate all Reals, it would be *infinitely long,* which _breaks the very definition of "algorithm"_ (a *finite sequence* of instructions)