Thanks so much. There are several other of my videos at ua-cam.com/play/PLzsFDzpSBhVMrkL3_7g-UngkZTKzUfX4H.html and there should be others but I am not sure whether I have uploaded them to youtube. I'll have to see over the coming weeks.
Great video. I want to cite some of the results in this video for my project report. Are the examples in this video from some other reference or your own?
There are two examples in the video. I am not sure if the 1/(1+25x^2) is exactly from a specific text but it is similar to one used in many texts. For example Sauer used 1/(1+12x^2). Epperson has 1/(1+25x^2) but not exactly the same spacing. The second example is from Sauer Numerical Analysis second edition p. 159. I hope that helps.
Thanks so much!! I will be teaching a different course this fall so may start making some videos for that one (mathematical physiology) once I learn the material :-) Have a great day.
Thanks man! Great tutorial! But I wonder at the end, how did you get e/1920. I mean I don't know how did you use lagrange formula to calculate. Could you please explain a little more? Thanks!
We're just replacing the x values with the points we calculated and the result is 1, then we have f(x) from which we need the n-th derivation. f(x)=e^x, so the n-th derivation is e^x again. Now we replace x with their highest value, notice how there are "max(...)" everywhere, which just means we're replacing with x its maximum value, which is 1, since we're only viewing x between [-1,1], which means 1 is our highest number. so when we replace all the values with their actual vaule our result ist e/1920.
I think I used the text by Dahlquist and Bjorck mostly but I cannot find my copy and also from Sauer. If you send me your email address I can send you my typed notes on the topic. I hope that might help.
These informations are so hard to find, because so few understands. And I wish I understood how those geniuses who came up with these algorithms and stuff. The hardest part about this is understanding why this is the algorithm and not the proofs and recognising the methods. Those are pretty easy. But am I supposed to understand "why"s from the proofs? Or just the "that's it"s. I always feel like something is still supposed to be there even if I understand what the proofs sais.
Thank you! Best Chebyshev polynomial interpolation I found on youtube.
Thank you so much! UA-cam videos help a lot. My Numerical Methods teacher never gives us examples and goes too fast
Thanks so much. Glad it was helpful to you. Have a great day.
Great video. Thank you
clear expalnation
Great video :)
Understood everything first time listening, cannot say the same about my professor haha...
Thanks so much. Very much appreciated. Have a great weekend.
Sound recorded with a rock?
Brilliant video, wish you had more numerical methods videos online
Thanks so much. There are several other of my videos at ua-cam.com/play/PLzsFDzpSBhVMrkL3_7g-UngkZTKzUfX4H.html and there should be others but I am not sure whether I have uploaded them to youtube. I'll have to see over the coming weeks.
excellently crafted
Great video. I want to cite some of the results in this video for my project report. Are the examples in this video from some other reference or your own?
There are two examples in the video. I am not sure if the 1/(1+25x^2) is exactly from a specific text but it is similar to one used in many texts. For example Sauer used 1/(1+12x^2). Epperson has 1/(1+25x^2) but not exactly the same spacing. The second example is from Sauer Numerical Analysis second edition p. 159. I hope that helps.
@@brucebukiet Thank you. That is what I needed
BRAVO! I just found this! I hope you're still making videos because you explain math so well?
Thanks so much!! I will be teaching a different course this fall so may start making some videos for that one (mathematical physiology) once I learn the material :-) Have a great day.
Thanks man! Great tutorial! But I wonder at the end, how did you get e/1920. I mean I don't know how did you use lagrange formula to calculate. Could you please explain a little more? Thanks!
We're just replacing the x values with the points we calculated and the result is 1, then we have f(x) from which we need the n-th derivation.
f(x)=e^x, so the n-th derivation is e^x again.
Now we replace x with their highest value, notice how there are "max(...)" everywhere, which just means we're replacing with x its maximum value, which is 1, since we're only viewing x between [-1,1], which means 1 is our highest number.
so when we replace all the values with their actual vaule our result ist e/1920.
I didn't understand the Sommerfeld bit. What exactly is the problem, or is it just a joke?
just a joke (not terribly funny)
Love the accent omg
Thanks so much for watching!!
He sounds exactly like Larry David 😂
I need some sources about tchebychev polynomial, hope you can help me sir
I think I used the text by Dahlquist and Bjorck mostly but I cannot find my copy and also from Sauer. If you send me your email address I can send you my typed notes on the topic. I hope that might help.
Thanks for the great video! I don't get the joke at the end though. :/
be grateful that you don't understand the joke, that means you haven't completely lost your mind to mathematics yet.
great video
thanks so much for watching it
Thank you ! :D
Thanks for commenting!
These informations are so hard to find, because so few understands. And I wish I understood how those geniuses who came up with these algorithms and stuff. The hardest part about this is understanding why this is the algorithm and not the proofs and recognising the methods. Those are pretty easy. But am I supposed to understand "why"s from the proofs? Or just the "that's it"s. I always feel like something is still supposed to be there even if I understand what the proofs sais.