Multiplying by 2, Getting Closer to 0 | p-adic numbers (p=2)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 17 гру 2024
  • [Note] p-adic numbers and base-n numeral systems are distinct concepts.
    The base-n numeral system (such as binary, decimal, etc.) is merely a matter of notation, while p-adic numbers represent a number system fundamentally different from real numbers.
    [BGM]
    伝承の丘 • 【公式・高音質】伝承の丘 - 秋山裕和【神秘...
    魔法使いと振り子時計 dova-s.jp/bgm/...
    Caravan dova-s.jp/bgm/...
    [Materials]
    VOICEVOX:ずんだもん (Zundamon, illustrated by sakamoto_AHR)
    VOICEVOX:四国めたん (Shikoku Metan, illustrated by sakamoto_AHR)
    (+ other tools)
    効果音ラボ (soundeffect-lab.info)
    pixabay
    This video uses synthesized voices.
    #math

КОМЕНТАРІ • 137

  • @zunda-theorem-en
    @zunda-theorem-en  3 дні тому +149

    [Note] p-adic numbers and base-n numeral systems are distinct concepts.
    The base-n numeral system (such as binary, decimal, etc.) is merely a matter of notation, while p-adic numbers represent a number system fundamentally different from real numbers.

    • @BleachWizz
      @BleachWizz 3 дні тому +11

      I always liked thinking about them as mod infinity numbers.
      do you think it's a valid analogy, I think it gives me a better intuition but I also feel I can be just wrong.
      ok perhaps mod infinity is not what I wanted to say. maybe it's better to compare with the complement of 2 that we use to represent negative numbers in computers so p-adics are complement of infinity... that's also a second way I think about it.

    • @f5673-t1h
      @f5673-t1h 2 дні тому +3

      @@BleachWizz No, you're right. The P-adics are the inverse limit of the intergers mod p^n.
      You have the rings of integers mod p, mod p^2, mod p^3, etc. and you take the inverse limit of this sequence, and you get the p-adics. So yes, you can think of it that way, that you're taking the integers mod p and continuously expanding it until you reach the p-adics at the limit, like it's mod p^infinity.
      The integers mod p^n are just the truncation of the p-adics to n digits (in base p). It's basically similar to how we only deal with terminating decimals to 2 places (when it comes to stuff like money), though not quite since that wouldn't be a ring. (it would be though if we took all the terminating decimals, but that's going off-topic)

    • @Omer-dv2ef
      @Omer-dv2ef 2 дні тому

      2 adic numbers have strong relationship with collatz conjecture.
      If you are curious about it please recomment me for more detail.

    • @Formalec
      @Formalec 2 дні тому +1

      P-adics are very unique alternative number systems that makes some computations easier too represent and do than in normal Reals.

    • @asdbanz316
      @asdbanz316 День тому

      @@f5673-t1h Does it make easier to work with elliptic curves over finite fields (first that came to mind)?

  • @chills_tiny_mom
    @chills_tiny_mom 3 дні тому +206

    Watching this instead of studying for my stats final

    • @livek1238
      @livek1238 3 дні тому +14

      STATISTICS?!
      *_GOD BLESS STATISTICS🦅🦅🦅_*

    • @gmdFrame
      @gmdFrame 3 дні тому +4

      This channel probably has stats videos

    • @Buorgenhaeren
      @Buorgenhaeren 3 дні тому +2

      This channel only has pure maths vids lmao

    • @slav7571
      @slav7571 3 дні тому +2

      Literally in the exact same situation. my stats final is tomorrow so that's even worse lol. Still, worth it to get a break from statistics for some... math.

    • @blarblablarblar
      @blarblablarblar 3 дні тому +1

      I watched interstellar instead of studying for my physics final :p

  • @GVS2001
    @GVS2001 3 дні тому +111

    I maybe p-addicted to Zundamon's videos

    • @ak_the_gr8
      @ak_the_gr8 3 дні тому +2

      is that Lancer deltarune?!?!!?!

    • @GVS2001
      @GVS2001 3 дні тому +2

      @ak_the_gr8 Oh, I'm not Lancer! I'm just a sweet little boy!

  • @RenderingUser
    @RenderingUser 3 дні тому +36

    This is one of my favourite math channels ever

  • @ghostagent3552
    @ghostagent3552 3 дні тому +100

    -1/12 is approaching

    • @MsGinko
      @MsGinko 3 дні тому +1

      Ramanujan...

    • @tomkerruish2982
      @tomkerruish2982 3 дні тому +4

      That's actually my suggested video right now (specifically, "The Return of -1/12" from Numberphile).

    • @kaidatong1704
      @kaidatong1704 2 дні тому +4

      @@MsGinko put some misleading title like Ranma 1/2

    • @Redstoner34526
      @Redstoner34526 2 години тому +1

      That’s 1+2+3+4+5+…

    • @kaidatong1704
      @kaidatong1704 37 хвилин тому +1

      @ I found the numberphile vid but probs can't post link

  • @Magmentorwastaken
    @Magmentorwastaken 3 дні тому +63

    WAKE UP CHAT, NEW ZUNDAMON'S THEOREM VIDEO‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️

  • @hexagonal7708
    @hexagonal7708 День тому +4

    How is it possible that I didn't know before that there is a version of this channel in English, I only knew it in Japanese,
    I'm so glad I found the channel

  • @Madoushi90
    @Madoushi90 3 дні тому +17

    12:02 Most notably, the two's compliment number system used by computers is a truncated 2-adic number system.

  • @m4rcyonstation93
    @m4rcyonstation93 3 дні тому +136

    Better than the veritaserum video

    • @nukeeverything1802
      @nukeeverything1802 3 дні тому +9

      Glad I'm not the only one who thought this

    • @HuyTheKiller
      @HuyTheKiller 3 дні тому +33

      I'd say watching Veritasium is fine if you have some prior knowledge, while Zundamon's Theorem is more focused on slowly exploring stuff from zero, accompanied by anime girls 🤡

    • @m4rcyonstation93
      @m4rcyonstation93 3 дні тому +18

      @@HuyTheKiller zundamon isn't an anime girl. Has the same art style but she's from vocaloid/neutrino/I think cevio now

    • @Jonny_XD_
      @Jonny_XD_ 3 дні тому

      @@m4rcyonstation93 Weeelllll, aaakkkttuuuaahhllyyyyy🤓☝

    • @sfglim5341
      @sfglim5341 3 дні тому +3

      I love eric rowland’s video about p-adic numbers, veritasium is bad at explaining things in general so I’ve stopped watching. Its unfortunate cuz they used to make great vids but now they’re meh. This channel is great tho

  • @pladselsker8340
    @pladselsker8340 3 дні тому +25

    Note to self:
    Always bring Zundamon with you to a dungeon.

  • @UltraAryan10
    @UltraAryan10 2 дні тому +12

    Mathematics may call this p-adic numbers but programmers may have seen something similar before known as unsigned integer overflow :)

  • @JustinFernandez-i7u
    @JustinFernandez-i7u 3 дні тому +8

    This is such a great video coming from a recent math bachelor. What makes these videos so great is the fact that Zundamon shares the exact same thoughts I do while watching the video, questions about rigor and epiphanies all corresponds to my thoughts while watching the video. So it's almost as the video is reading my mind.

  • @floofynooplz4268
    @floofynooplz4268 3 дні тому +10

    thank you as always for your hard work zundamon’s theorem en! absolute cinema from the goat 🐐🐐🐐

  • @goldeer7129
    @goldeer7129 3 дні тому +5

    I really like the small story elements during the video, they're short, add lore and engagement to the video, I think they're great! Please continue doing them!

  • @smelly_sox3670
    @smelly_sox3670 3 дні тому +11

    These videos scratch a very weird part of my brain, thank you guys for another great upload

  • @Teramixu00pl
    @Teramixu00pl День тому +2

    I'm commenting to get a hi from the creator of this amazing content!

  • @Rikri
    @Rikri 3 дні тому +9

    What's interesting to me is that the infinite geometric series formula seems to, in a sense, "diverge" if |p|infinity doesn't make sense in the p-adic numbers); so in this way, the p-adics really are the complete opposite of the real numbers.

    • @louisrobitaille5810
      @louisrobitaille5810 5 годин тому

      Yet p-adics contain some real numbers, so they're not really the opposite 🤔.

  • @17duchuanle
    @17duchuanle 3 дні тому +8

    i love zundaemon theorem

  • @35FruitPunchSamuraiG
    @35FruitPunchSamuraiG 3 дні тому +8

    BABE WAKE UP, ZUNDAMON JUST DROPPED🗣🔥🗣🔥

  • @GVS2001
    @GVS2001 3 дні тому +8

    "That's impossible"
    She is just like me frfr

  • @ShaolinMonkster
    @ShaolinMonkster День тому +2

    wtf , why this channel is so good?

  • @MsGinko
    @MsGinko 3 дні тому +18

    The Most Beautiful Equations:
    Euler: Euler's Identity
    Einstein: Mass-Energy Equivalence
    Zundamon: Geometric Series Formula

  • @Maddieee99
    @Maddieee99 День тому +1

    another amazing zundamons theorem upload

  • @fgvcosmic6752
    @fgvcosmic6752 3 дні тому +3

    I actually love these videos. I'm a maths student myself, but some of these concepts have either not been taught yet or are considered irrelevant to the course. This is, somehow, the first I've learnt about how p-adic numbers work (despite _using_ them in group theory)

  • @xoiyoub
    @xoiyoub 3 дні тому +8

    Anime girls and math, the two best creations of mankind

  • @MisakaMikotoDesu
    @MisakaMikotoDesu День тому +1

    Adic number systems are beautiful. I remember my first time learning that ...999 + 1 = 0 it blew my mind

  • @xsukk
    @xsukk 3 дні тому +6

    You know what, at 4:50 "In the middle of discussion, what is it this time?" and here came 2 ads

  • @pengutiny6464
    @pengutiny6464 3 дні тому +11

    2:59 PI BACKWARDS? 😶‍🌫️

    • @tedr.5978
      @tedr.5978 2 дні тому

      Well....a slice of pie, not the complete pi.

    • @pengutiny6464
      @pengutiny6464 2 дні тому

      @ yeah, i know. thats where it stops

  • @asterMedia003
    @asterMedia003 2 дні тому +1

    I just stumbled upon this channel and I'm glad I did. You guys create amazing videos and i can actually understand maths through these than from other videos.
    Hope you guys will continue uploading amazing videos like this :)

  • @Jalli95
    @Jalli95 3 дні тому +3

    I love ur vids and especially the lore so much pls never stop

  • @nkdibai
    @nkdibai 3 дні тому +3

    What blows my mind is that some p-adic numbers can equal the imaginary unit!

  • @DrJulianNewmansChannel
    @DrJulianNewmansChannel 2 дні тому +3

    Beautiful video - I keep hearing "p-adic" being name-dropped, but never actually learned about them. I'm curious: would I be reading too much into things if I suspect an intentional pun at 0:19? Namely, when "there's no choice", i.e. in ZF without countable choice, there's no way to disprove [assuming ZF's consistency] the existence of an infinite sequence of two-element sets whose Cartesian product is empty - matching the equation on the screen!

  • @nandap.n4715
    @nandap.n4715 6 годин тому

    Please make this a fun channel that can provide context or understanding about math that is acceptable to the general public, in other words please teach people about math at an advanced level but still acceptable even for someone who failed math class

  • @Amonimus
    @Amonimus 3 дні тому +3

    "We can't move until we solve this mystery"
    What's this, 7th Guest and Professor Layton?

  • @dragonmoonwave
    @dragonmoonwave 3 дні тому +2

    Babe wake up, new Zundamons Theorem video just dropped.

  • @MsGinko
    @MsGinko 3 дні тому +1

    Zundamon and Metan want to break the Internet. Another great video!

  • @ArcanaChandra
    @ArcanaChandra День тому +2

    My brain aint braining, help(;-;)

  • @whyre69
    @whyre69 3 дні тому +3

    i love p-adic numbers, they give us an idea on how modular arithmetic can be used to solve diophantine equations

  • @raydencreed1524
    @raydencreed1524 2 дні тому

    1:42
    We're not taking this result seriously enough.

  • @pikchassis
    @pikchassis 2 дні тому

    we are witnessing modern turning a sphere inside out

  • @DocRekd-fi2zk
    @DocRekd-fi2zk 3 дні тому +3

    they feel somehow similar to modulo p arithmetic. For example that sum of 10... = -1 in modulo 2 arithmetic too

    • @happygimp0
      @happygimp0 Годину тому

      There is at least a connection.
      One way is to compare 2adic numbers to signed integers with 2s complement. There, it is the same as numeric value modulo integer limit. For example, -1 mod 65536 = 65535 = 0xFFFF (all 1's).
      The other way is to store "1/3" or similar in a unsigned integer. When you have a 16 bit unsigned integer with 0xAAAB and multiply it with 3 you get 1. This is just a padic that is cut after 16 binary digits. And 0xAAAB = 43691 which is the multiplicative inverse of 3 and 65536 (0x10000).

  • @hades1874
    @hades1874 День тому +1

    10:10 The fact that p needs to a prime number, is it somehow related to the fact that any interger can be formed by the product of primes ?

  • @nickhollow
    @nickhollow 2 дні тому +1

    For normal numbers? No
    For piadic nimbers? Yeah

  • @cannasue
    @cannasue 3 дні тому +1

    watching this right now instead of studying for my calculus finals 💀😭🙏

  • @redpacific359
    @redpacific359 3 дні тому +5

    wait, why am i here? i have a math test tomorrow, and i know these knowledge are not going to be useful in the test 💀

  • @kaidatong1704
    @kaidatong1704 2 дні тому +1

    just saw title. ah yes, p-adic numbers

    • @kaidatong1704
      @kaidatong1704 2 дні тому

      a series on exploring the multiverse so vast that there's always gotta be somewhere weird thing is somehow true

  • @f5673-t1h
    @f5673-t1h 2 дні тому +1

    Just to clarify: The real numbers and the p-adics are completely separate things. Don't go into your calculus class saying stuff like "2^infnity equals zero", because you're working with reals in calculus, not p-adics.
    The two arise in the same way from the rationals: You define a way to measure distances between rational numbers, and then fill in the gaps. The only difference is how you defined distances.
    From there, you get different definitions of convergence, and so series (that only have rational terms) that converge in one, may not in the other. (1+2+3+... and 1+1/2+1/3+... still diverge in both)
    I specify "that only have rational terms" because the numbers that exist in one may not exist in the other. Like how the 5-adics have sqrt(-1) but not sqrt(2), the opposite of the reals, while the 3-adics have neither. Moreover, p-adics have their own transcendentals with no analoge in the reals (just like the p-adics don't have pi nor e).
    The p-adics also have some strange (and more beautiful) behaviors. For example, series with terms that converge to zero, don't necessarily converge in the reals (e.g. 1+1/2+1/3+...). But in the p-adics, they DO necessarily converge (I'm not saying 1+1/2+1/3+... converges in the p-adics, read what I said carefully. The terms don't converge to anything under the p-adic distance).
    So in the p-adics, a series converges if and only if its terms converge to zero. A statament that only holds in one directoin in the reals rather than both.
    You also have some funky stuff, like how all triangles are isosceles in the p-adics. You take any three numbers in the p-adics, and two of the pairwise distances are equal. Like 1 5 6 in the 5-adics, the distances are 1/5 between 1 and 6, but 1 between the other two pairs. So they make an isoceles triangle.

  • @TotallyNotJ4denn
    @TotallyNotJ4denn 2 дні тому

    When I saw the thumbnail I was thinking like this:
    2^inf = 2 x 2 x 2…
    (2^inf-1) 2 x 2 x 2… / 2
    (inf - inf) = inf
    2^inf = 0

  • @20LeeBrian1
    @20LeeBrian1 День тому +1

    Who is watching this before 16 hours of final exam 😂

  • @vash-san
    @vash-san 2 дні тому

    Wow, what a cool channel!

  • @louisrobitaille5810
    @louisrobitaille5810 5 годин тому

    After Eric Rowland and Veritasium, now Zundamon presents p-adic numbers 👀.
    (I still think that Eric Rowland's video is the best to explain the p-adic as he goes into much more details 😅…)

  • @Misha-g3b
    @Misha-g3b 3 дні тому +2

    2^(+inf.)=+inf., but 2^(-inf.)=0.

  • @serina762
    @serina762 3 дні тому +5

    huh... the hallway and numbers have swapped sides from the JP iteration of this video. wonder what's up with that?

    • @sponk13
      @sponk13 3 дні тому +1

      It's probably related to the fact that Japanese is written right to left whereas English is written left to right. Although google says that left to right is becoming more common in Japanese writing.

    • @vonneumann6161
      @vonneumann6161 3 дні тому +1

      ⁠​⁠​⁠@sponk13Japanese is written top to bottom (vertically), right to left. And left to right is not becoming more common. We right left to right when we write horizontally and right to left when we write vertically.
      It’s written vertically in most non-STEM books. It’s almost never written vertically in the STEM fields because it’s hard to write mathematical formulas vertically. Other than that, in handwriting, it’s up to preference.

    • @sponk13
      @sponk13 2 дні тому

      @@vonneumann6161 I stand corrected. I’m glad someone who knows more could clarify. I had now idea it was so specific to context.

    • @serina762
      @serina762 2 дні тому +1

      thank you both for clearing things up for me!

  • @PinkheartRoblox
    @PinkheartRoblox 2 дні тому

    Lets wait till zundamon starts to teach the korean language

  • @allaincumming6313
    @allaincumming6313 3 дні тому +3

    Ando bien pedo viendo esto xd, pura calidad

  • @RACEUR2
    @RACEUR2 2 дні тому

    Math and anime girl... The youtube algorithm really gets me

  • @FireyDeath4
    @FireyDeath4 2 дні тому +1

    Do they have more similar properties to the real and hyperreal numbers if you use an omegadic (ω-adic) number system?
    Also, is a googolminex (10^-(10^100)) considered an extremely large number in polyadic systems? And, can there be a system where digits can extend infinitely on both sides? And, are there hyperreal polyadic systems where you can have digits at ω or more places on the left? And, is there an equivalent for the real numbers?
    BTW, an unexplored topic in this video is how you can generate fractions as well as negative numbers, like 1/2=1̅2₃ (...11112)₃. (In the real number system we have 1/2=0·1̅₃=(0·1111...)₃.) Can you also generate irrational numbers by having a non-repetitive digital sequence on the left side?

  • @pinzau-87471
    @pinzau-87471 3 дні тому +4

    Thanks but now I feel more confused 😭

  • @pizza8725
    @pizza8725 2 дні тому +1

    There were some numbers where ab=0 and a,b≠0 but i forgot its name

  • @Hxcker_47
    @Hxcker_47 3 дні тому +3

    But what are the practical applications for this?

    • @lpi3
      @lpi3 2 дні тому

      In the end she is saying about quantum mechanics

  • @AshifKhan-sn6jx
    @AshifKhan-sn6jx 3 дні тому +3

    I didn't get even a single thing in the vid 😢. Time to google

    • @AshifKhan-sn6jx
      @AshifKhan-sn6jx 3 дні тому

      I might be wrong. But we are just using a different distance function innit?. In 2-diac numbers, the powers of 2 converges to zero since it becomes close to the 0 according to some weird distance function. That's why we get the wierd infinite digits at the right side.
      [I am just pulling it out of hat. I am just guessing]

    • @AshifKhan-sn6jx
      @AshifKhan-sn6jx 3 дні тому

      I am guessing for 1/(2^n) it grows without bound

  • @cdkw2
    @cdkw2 3 дні тому +1

    nice story!

  • @hedgehogsch.7270
    @hedgehogsch.7270 2 години тому

    So, we just assign unique numbers in p-based numeral system to all real values from 0 to 1?

  • @日に日に良くになる
    @日に日に良くになる День тому +2

    Im bad at math so idk why im watching this

  • @vaniragujana
    @vaniragujana 3 дні тому +3

    Wonderful channel. Underrated one definitely

  • @哲荆
    @哲荆 День тому +1

    Really simpler?? Exponential function in p-adic is not even continuous!!!

  • @also_nothing
    @also_nothing День тому +1

    If this is true then
    infinity + negative infinity= 0

  • @faithur1935
    @faithur1935 3 дні тому +1

    Why is 10000000...(2) equal to 0(2)? Why did 1 on the left side disappear?

    • @vonneumann6161
      @vonneumann6161 3 дні тому +1

      Because it goes infinitely to the left

    • @goldeer7129
      @goldeer7129 3 дні тому +1

      Because we define it to be this way in this context. To understand how things are defined, and thus how they work after that, I encourage you to research how they are mathematically defined. This video's goal is to explore intuitively how to manipulate such (man-invented) concepts, I think it does a great job at it. For the full story, it's about how to define these notions mathematically and what more we can do with them.

    • @Alphabet576
      @Alphabet576 2 дні тому

      because we define it as the limit of a sequence of numbers that, under a certain notion of "distance" (the p-adic norm), gets arbitrarily close to 0. much like how in the real numbers, .0000...0001 is treated as being 0, because the sequence that defines it gets arbitrarily close to 0 under the traditional absolute value notion of distance

  • @ptitemoi
    @ptitemoi День тому +1

    rgp maker ahh music hehehe

  • @rekire___
    @rekire___ 3 дні тому +1

    Math bros why we are here just to suffer?

  • @NihalPushkar
    @NihalPushkar 2 дні тому

    Correct me if I am wrong, but saying 1.... 0000 .... 000_(2) ---> 0 in the limit does not seems correct to me

  • @Nic0rasu
    @Nic0rasu 3 дні тому +1

    em -1.

  • @hunterofinnovation007
    @hunterofinnovation007 3 дні тому +2

    3

  • @anukranan
    @anukranan 2 дні тому

    How.

  • @hayakore
    @hayakore 3 дні тому +2

    yippe new vid

  • @Arsenniy
    @Arsenniy 3 дні тому +1

    I... uh

  • @hunterofinnovation007
    @hunterofinnovation007 3 дні тому +1

    3 i

  • @DavinMC11
    @DavinMC11 3 дні тому +1

    Aleph-1 😎😎😎😎

  • @Effect_channel
    @Effect_channel 3 дні тому +1

    Formula: 2^(n+1)=2ⁿ×2
    If 2^∞ is 0, than 2^∞-1 is also 0, since 0/2 is 0, and it continues to 2¹=0 which is not true since 2^1 is 2.
    So 2^∞=0 is a fake statement. Nice try.

    • @MsGinko
      @MsGinko 3 дні тому +2

      " 2^∞ is 0, than 2^∞-1 is also 0 " wrong. If you has defined 2^∞ = 0 then 2^∞ -1 = -1, not zero. Fail analysis.

    • @vonneumann6161
      @vonneumann6161 3 дні тому

      You can’t “continue to 2^1” because you have to do it infinitely from 2^inf

    • @goldeer7129
      @goldeer7129 3 дні тому +1

      We work in a, self-imposed arbitrarily defined space of numbers. In the real numbers "2^infty" obviously does converge to infinity and not 0. Then it's about how things work in the way we have defined them to be, which might be different from usuals. So "2^infty = 0" is a fake statement in the usual real numbers, but we specifically work in a different way here.
      Also, your argument is wrong in the real numbers too. 2^-(n+1) = 2^-n * 1/2 and "2^-(infty)" does indeed converge to 0 but it doesn't mean we can 'continue' to 2^-1 = 0 which would be false in the reals. The argument that we can 'continue' is not working anyway.

  • @Jalli95
    @Jalli95 3 дні тому +2

    Zundamon is so goated ong 🧌