The Riemann Hypothesis

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 22 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 1 тис.

  • @andersjaevel
    @andersjaevel 7 років тому +646

    The proof of the Riemann Hypothesis is clear and we leave as an exercise to the reader.

    • @ItachiUchiha-ns1il
      @ItachiUchiha-ns1il 6 років тому +5

      andersjaevel damn that’s good one lmao

    • @69erthx1138
      @69erthx1138 5 років тому +3

      You need a couple of pints and few less text books mate.

    • @ДмитроПрищепа-д3я
      @ДмитроПрищепа-д3я 5 років тому +4

      Some good Landau right there.

    • @yashhkotecha2647
      @yashhkotecha2647 5 років тому +11

      Trivial*

    • @RodelIturalde
      @RodelIturalde 4 роки тому +2

      @supadox Because often, the proof is rather easy to make if you did understand exactly the proofs and methods the textbook used to prove some other thing just before.
      And it is actually a good excercise to come up with ones own proofs. Though it is extremely hard i think.

  • @72ackerman
    @72ackerman 9 років тому +593

    This is a great explanation of the Riemann hypothesis. I like how you presented it in historical context, broke it down into parts, and explained its relationship to other aspects of mathematics. Very critically, you presented the equations, you explained the intuitive portions to non-mathematicians, and you did it with the enthusiasm that is difficult to glean from dry textbooks. Love your UA-cam posts and your appearances on Brady's videos. Keep up the great work.

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  9 років тому +50

      +72ackerman Thank you very much!

    • @72ackerman
      @72ackerman 9 років тому +25

      +singingbanana Also, you finally taught me what that big Pi means before an equation, which I had not known before! (Math looks less like hieroglyphics now).

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  9 років тому +27

      +72ackerman Ha, I'm glad.

    • @christosvoskresye
      @christosvoskresye 9 років тому +3

      +72ackerman
      The symbol
      is used for continued fractions. Well, not really, but I like the idea of using actual hieroglyphics for math.

    • @christosvoskresye
      @christosvoskresye 9 років тому +2

      +christosvoskresye And, of course, it doesn't show.

  • @dhidhi1000
    @dhidhi1000 9 років тому +155

    I find it interesting that I watched this video about 2 years ago when I was 17, and I remember I didn't understand somethings. Now I'm on college, and I decided to watch this again, and surprisingly enough, I got a lot more of what he said. It's nice to see our own development in practice.

    • @nicolasd6391
      @nicolasd6391 8 років тому +4

      I am looking forward to understanding this:)

    • @pakan357
      @pakan357 8 років тому +1

      I feel exactly the same way. Although I failed both of my Math classes, I learned quite a lot.

    • @tggt00
      @tggt00 8 років тому +1

      +Dhiego Bersan Same here except I was 14 when I first watched this and now I'm 16 and I understand everything perfectly.

    • @darmodak1773
      @darmodak1773 8 років тому +12

      +tggt00 bahahahahahah

    • @tggt00
      @tggt00 8 років тому

      What's so funny?

  • @hummanuhblubberrumma
    @hummanuhblubberrumma 10 років тому +67

    I believe that we just got -1/12'd again.

  • @GermanSnipe14
    @GermanSnipe14 10 років тому +140

    "It was like the mathematical equivalent of a mic drop. Peace out, that's it. I'm done" ahahaha I love you Dr Grime

  • @lightclock9761
    @lightclock9761 2 роки тому +4

    It is brilliant. Clear explanation of Reimann Hypothesis is given, and it is inspiring.

  • @nge1301
    @nge1301 11 років тому +75

    I dropped out of grade school and almost got this! It got hard after 0:08 though.

  • @LVBradley2013
    @LVBradley2013 11 років тому +2

    As a pure mathematics major, all I want is to sit down with you and learn even more. Wonderful video as always, Dr. Grime.

  • @FelipeBudinich
    @FelipeBudinich 9 років тому +318

    Aaaand, it might be easier to earn a million dollars selling hotdogs :D

    • @SD-de4do
      @SD-de4do 8 років тому +3

      it all depends on how you go about it ;)

    • @deeptochatterjee532
      @deeptochatterjee532 7 років тому +22

      Felipe Budinich Or just borrow a small loan of a million dollars

    • @cameronspalding9792
      @cameronspalding9792 6 років тому

      Deepto Chatterjee And you’d have to pay it back within a long time interval

    • @j.vonhogen9650
      @j.vonhogen9650 3 роки тому +1

      Just rob a bank, or build one!

  • @Popexssj
    @Popexssj 10 років тому +51

    I love to eat my dinners and watch this dude. His videos are usually long enough for me to finish my food.
    Too bad I don't understand a single thing he's saying.

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  10 років тому +25

      I love that I'm somehow a strange part of your daily rituals. I have a similar habit.

    • @CafeAlpha
      @CafeAlpha 10 років тому +14

      There's a Japanese club for families to learn a bunch of languages, and the funny thing is that the guy who started the club requires people who join, as their first assignment, read Heisenberg's book on quantum theory.
      He says that it won't make any sense to you, but that if you're going to learn new languages you're going to have to get used to reading things that don't make sense to you...
      Though, obviously, some of his members did come to understand Heisenberg's book because they published a book that goes through every single step of proving that Schrodinger's wave equations are equivalent to Heisenberg's version. It was written by students who had just learned it, on the theory that you're better at remembering all the details and explaining something that you've just learned. And it's very Japanese, full of cute little cartoons and asides like how to draw a cartoon the physicist De Broglie, who's face is shaped like a peanut.

    • @Snijele
      @Snijele 10 років тому

      Popexssj same here bro. :)

  • @BradleyRobinson
    @BradleyRobinson 10 років тому +4

    James, sincere thanks for following through on this request by interested viewers like me, I am familiar with the content but the nuances continue to grow over time. The internet access to information sources like these youtube channels is a stunning contrast to when I was first introduced to it reading a paper back copy of "Stalking the Riemann Hypothesis by Dan Rockmore" around 2005 "by candlelight". Watching this now three or four times over two days was again similarly juxtaposed personally.." very exciting" and a thoroughly helpful addition to the initial "incredible read" experience. The interval between then and now is remarkably influenced and is clearly given me access to real structure by better understanding the mathematics, especially in the margins of addition and multiplication. The theorem's wide appeal to many pursuits is in itself remarkable. In all the video here is "Exquisitely arranged material and lucidly presented with admirable understanding and enthusiasm in a skilled detailed explanation". So much of what excites me about mathematics is how much there is to learn and the many open questions still abound in this wild field... exploring the unknown... and its good to leave a trail!

  • @ChongFrisbee
    @ChongFrisbee 11 років тому +6

    You, sir, are a gentleman and the gratest math comunicator ever. Thank you.

  • @RBuckminsterFuller
    @RBuckminsterFuller 11 років тому +33

    I studied math for a while a couple of years ago and I almost understood all of this. I'm so proud of my brain.

    • @taherajna
      @taherajna 11 років тому +1

      same feeling XD

  • @eamonnsiocain6454
    @eamonnsiocain6454 5 років тому +1

    You take those topics which were always presented to me in the driest possible ways while I was working on my Maths degree and make them fascinating.

  • @technowey
    @technowey 8 років тому +10

    Great lecture. Your deep knowledge is apparent, but you're also an excellent communicator. Thanks for the videos you've made.

  • @Epicaq
    @Epicaq 11 років тому +2

    Whenever I feel too clever, I just tune in on this channel and I feel stupid again. I love how passionate Jim feels towards math. Makes me passionate about it, even though I'm no strong mathematician. Keep it up :)

  • @shield543
    @shield543 11 років тому +19

    Dr James Grime, I salute you for finally making this video! :)

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  11 років тому +28

      The natural length of this video turned out to be 20 minutes. Normally they're only about 6 minutes. That proves something, but I'm not quite sure what yet.

    • @paradoxica424
      @paradoxica424 11 років тому +8

      singingbanana New proposition: Any attempt to explain a currently unsolved mathematical proposition/hypothesis will take about π times the expected length of time.

    • @ClayCompton
      @ClayCompton 10 років тому

      singingbanana It means this video should've been a three-parter.

  • @hillwin10
    @hillwin10 10 років тому +1

    This guy makes even the most daunting subjects seem approachable. It's so much easier to stay excited and learn like this. I wish all teacher were like this, maybe then more people would be interested in maths (perhaps then, people who are naturally drawn to maths and physics wouldn't feel so isolated *sighs*).

  • @arsenelupin123
    @arsenelupin123 11 років тому +7

    Thank for the crash course, James.

  • @alexanderjones1129
    @alexanderjones1129 9 років тому +1

    By far the most understandable and interesting explanation of the Riemann Hypothesis.

  • @OhDannyBoy512
    @OhDannyBoy512 11 років тому +63

    I feel ridiculously out of my depth watching this video. I only feel as though I partially understood this because you led us through it in such a logical and sequential order! Thank you for the brain strain! :)

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  11 років тому +21

      This one isn't for everyone. I'll do something more accessible next time.

    • @michaelbauers8800
      @michaelbauers8800 6 років тому +1

      I know this post is old, but don't feel too badly IMO. I have read a book on this, and studied a lot of math in college, and it's not simple to follow. I think I would have been equally lost had I not read a book on this, and remembered the equations. I was confused a few times by the book ( Derbyshire,) and this video is actually simpler, but it's dense. I would benefit from watching it again, I think.

    • @twizzler2682
      @twizzler2682 Рік тому

      @@singingbanana The Riemann hypothesis is a distraction
      The True lie on the Sum of all Natural Numbers
      The answer to this problem of -1/12 is that Jesus come back to say to everyone "i have 12 Apostles"

  • @rubenscabral2657
    @rubenscabral2657 3 роки тому +1

    The primes is a vortex number that goes back and forth with the number (0) in the center 7+7+7 opposite 3-3-3-3 also 6+6+6+6 opposite 4-4-4-4 also 9+9+9+opposite 1-1-1-1 in the case of the number (5) it doubles on it

  • @ShonkyLegs
    @ShonkyLegs 9 років тому +4

    I can't believe I just found this channel. I can't believe this is the channel name. I can't believe you have Little Professor as your banner.
    I'm very pleased.

  • @jeffreyluciana8711
    @jeffreyluciana8711 8 років тому +1

    The 5 travels down the grouping of 6 from the 5th position to the first position to the 25 and cancels out the right prime to 24.
    The 7 travels to the right through the first position back to the first position of 48 and cancels out 49.
    The squares of primes cancel out other primes. That is why the number of prime numbers less than a certain number follows the inverse of the log

  • @Ishuzu
    @Ishuzu 11 років тому +7

    i have no idea what i just watched but i still enjoyed it.

  • @sabassegovia3915
    @sabassegovia3915 10 років тому +1

    I transferred from a community college and began my first quarter in an actual university in California (UC Davis). I transferred to study math but had no interest in it at all, it was just a way to move on. I wish I began watching your videos earlier, here and on numberphile. They've made some hard to grasp topics much more enjoyable and understandable, such as the video where you deal with the different types of infinity. I look forward to newer videos from you and everyone on numberphile.

  • @JohnSmith-cy8hq
    @JohnSmith-cy8hq 10 років тому +23

    "..that Riemann decided to rip off, I mean study." I coughed up my chocolate milk.

  • @bur2000
    @bur2000 2 роки тому +2

    If someone still reads this: it is often said, if we could prove the Rieman Hypothesis, it would give great insight into the nature of primes. Is that the case though? We already have that insight, we just can't prove it's the correct insight. Proving it just means: "yes, what you now only assume is true about the nature of primes, definitely is true". In a way that's how every other science than math operates all the time. Just assuming.

  • @connorgibes709
    @connorgibes709 8 років тому +3

    Every time I watch this, I understand it a little bit more.

  • @trejkaz
    @trejkaz 11 років тому +1

    When I saw this was about the Riemann Hypothesis, I wondered if the 1+2+3+4+5+6+... = -1/12 thing would find its way in here as well, and was not disappointed.

  • @InvitingShores
    @InvitingShores 11 років тому +3

    I cannot state having understood, but I'm greatly inspired to learn more to understand it finally. Thanks James and don't let the gap between consecutive videos be as big as those between big prime numbers! ;-)

  • @carlosarturomunozcastro3180
    @carlosarturomunozcastro3180 2 роки тому +2

    CARITO BENAVIDES MONTILLA
    MiUltimaHistoria
    Pensaba yo en estos tiempos difíciles
    Llenos de incompresiones y desencantos
    en tantas buenas razones Para soñar
    Y sin quejas, sin desfallecer, si… con todo
    El agrado y los buenos sentimientos…
    pensaba con nostalgia
    De la inocencia de aquellos años
    De esos primeros amores
    Con yannette, teressitta, floralba…
    Si… florssitta amore mio,
    Que al recordarlas, vuelven a nacer
    Y recuerdo en mi memoria
    Aquellos tiempos de … de Carito
    CaritoBenavidesMontilla diMugnoz
    Mi bello, nuevo y gran amor….
    Ella era una miss de Boston
    Ocasellb: OcassoDiBellSetBuck
    Que daba clase en la escuela di
    Cullinnarii et pannes también…
    Le gustaba el español
    Y aunque lo hablaba poquito
    Tenía esos ojos bonitos
    Que hablaban muy bien por ella
    Carito me habla en inglés. Aveces…
    Que bonito se veía sola o en compañía
    De unos que admiraban como io
    Lo que jamas seria per me, perque
    Io ya era cassado: con Florsitta, Con DianaCarolinna, y por supuesto, conLaFuncion Zetta di Riemann
    Carito me habla en inglés et también en Italiano, germanny, francais, portuggisse,
    Mandarin pictórico y por su puesto, En un quichua, básico para viajar por ecuador, peru, Bolivia, chile, y volver al final de tanto andar, de tanto amar,
    de tanto padecer su belleza,
    Que me dice: yo no se
    Carlitos don´t be like that
    Now listen to me
    You will pay attention
    I need you to write in english
    Muy perfecto parragraph
    And tell me where did you learn
    Donde tu aprender to be tan coqueto
    Remember nada de futbol
    Until you finish the work you have
    Y me daba una sonrisa
    Y yo me quedaba loquito
    Y despues en el examen
    Lo ponía todo al reves
    Carito se fue del valle Yo la recuerdo cantando Porque me dejo muy triste cuando Para su tierra se fue
    Carlito dime que si, me eneñaras todo
    Para no quierer morir per te…….
    Carito don´t tell me no
    Que me muero por tu amor
    Que importa la raza
    Tampoco el idioma
    Si al fin lo que cuenta
    Es lo buena persona
    Si es del altiplano
    O de tierra caliente
    Si al fin lo que vale
    Es que sea buena gente
    Que importa su credo
    Si es hombre de influyente
    Si al fin lo que cuenta
    Es la gente decente
    No importa si es blanco
    Si es pobre o famoso
    Si al fin lo que vale
    Es que cante sabroso
    Pudiera escribir un millón de tequieros
    Y algunos teamosrepletos de sinceridad…
    Pero esta vez, ire lo mas lento posible…
    Paso a paso, dia a dia, verso a verso,
    Para que ni tu ni yo se pierdan
    En tanta vanalidad en que habre envuelto
    Mi extensa vida que alguien resumirá:

  • @aleggs6019
    @aleggs6019 8 років тому +6

    in tenth grade atm, almost got the jist of it, hoping I'll be able to understand better as I learn.

  • @zimbabweian
    @zimbabweian 11 років тому +1

    I am currently doing a doctoral degree in Physics where I use the Riemann zeta function all the time. I had no idea of its origin or how interesting it really was, just kinda used it as a tool up until now. Great video, really enhanced my interest on the subject!

  • @Solitaan
    @Solitaan 10 років тому +8

    Even though I have almost no idea what he was talking about, I still feel a little bit smarter just watching it xD

  • @evalsoftserver
    @evalsoftserver 3 роки тому +1

    A Solution for the RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION is extremely valuable because It also point to Solutions for enhancing the HAMILTON GEOMETRZATION Poincare conjecture, Hodge Invariance conjecture as it relates to PRIME NUMBERS, TAYLOR INFINITE SERIES ,MACULIN SERIES and Doing Arithmetic past ZERO or Singularity as it is called in Analytic Geometry , and Algebraic Geometry, and it Directly points to the Prime factorization Algorithm , the Division algorithm, and the QUADRIATIC FORMULA This Solves many DIMENSIONS and RANK IN THE COMPLEX FUNCTION PLANE for MANIFOLD like The Kahler MANIFOLD ,CALIBU YAU MANIFOLD simeoustanesly and Points to Soulutions to the entire Millennium Prize Problems proposed by The Early 20th Century Philospher and Mathematician David HILBERT , Including the YANG-MILL Mass GAP , and the NP COMPUTATION time space COMPLEXITY problem also know as the Traveling Salesman problem

  • @kot_robot8205
    @kot_robot8205 11 років тому +4

    there's a very interesting book "Prime Obsession" by John Derbyshire, it is all about primes, zeta function, the riemann hypothesis, and Riemann himself :D

    • @lPlanetarizado
      @lPlanetarizado 6 років тому

      yeah very interesting book, it also talks about the connection between HR and physics

  • @kevroy314
    @kevroy314 10 років тому +2

    If I came to the UK could I take you out to lunch or something? Through your fantastic presentation style (and I really mean you, not just numberphile) you've managed to get my mathematically agnostic SO presenting proofs to strangers at restaurants. Between this feat of magic and your continued ability to inspire my own insterest in maths beyond a lowly undergraduate minor, you've quickly become one of my favorite people on the Internet. If not lunch, please let me know some other way I might support you!

  • @hawk0485
    @hawk0485 9 років тому +71

    the person who proves it, if he/she has watched this video should go back and leave a comment like: "lol, proved it."

    • @ZonkoKongo
      @ZonkoKongo 7 років тому +1

      yea gonna do that, just give me some time

    • @giuseppeforte8687
      @giuseppeforte8687 6 років тому

      Looks like someone did it

  • @PuglyWont
    @PuglyWont 11 років тому +1

    Thanks for making this video. I had the Riemann Hypothesis explained by a professor once, (in a most excellent way too, outside with sidewalk chalk)... but I forgot much of the explanation. I'll have to watch this a few more times to really have it all sink in. I'd like to see more videos like this with the right level of detail without getting bogged down in the formulas too much. I especially like pointing out the important parts of involved formulas.

  • @ML-uu5ik
    @ML-uu5ik 6 років тому

    You did an awesome job explaining this. I have been reading/watching videos on this for the last couple days trying to find a sufficient explanation of what in the world the connection is between the zeta function and prime numbers, and you explained it well enough that I am sufficiently satisfied. Thank you!

  • @ThatSpazChick
    @ThatSpazChick 10 років тому +106

    I do not have the education necessary to watch this.

    • @gameragedad8953
      @gameragedad8953 10 років тому +10

      Sad thing is, I have the education necessary to watch this, but I don't have the patience to listen to him. I feel like I'm listening to a lecture from a professor asking myself the same question I did then "Why the hell do I even care about this?". No offense to the presenter, he is a great guy and math is his thing and I'm glad he can get excited about it. He's also made some other cool videos that have kept me entertained, but this one is for the egghead nerds for sure.

    • @ThatSpazChick
      @ThatSpazChick 10 років тому +42

      GameRage Dad I'm the opposite. I have no idea what he's talking about but I love listening to it nonetheless. Most of the reason may be his adorable, awesome accent.

    • @ThatSpazChick
      @ThatSpazChick 10 років тому +6

      khaled khunaifer You're hurting my brain.

    • @mikecheng104mike
      @mikecheng104mike 10 років тому +8

      khaled khunaifer yeah... you missed the complex analysis part, we all wish we can LOL

    • @ThatSpazChick
      @ThatSpazChick 10 років тому

      ***** Seventeen with the math ability of an eight-year-old.

  • @AliElamraniElhanchi
    @AliElamraniElhanchi 10 років тому +2

    You sir have a talent for teaching and for communicating information the best way possible. I thank you with all my heart for these explanations and these videos. Keep up the good work!

  • @Jag0n03
    @Jag0n03 10 років тому +7

    Picturing Riemann doing a mic drop and saying "Peace out, y'all" had me dying.

  • @darwinbodero7872
    @darwinbodero7872 2 місяці тому

    I think the best part of this video is he explicitly defined the Riemann zeta function across the entire domain. Most authors just give the infinite series definition and say “by analytic continuation” everywhere else. Which is totally useless

  • @gingerfeest
    @gingerfeest 11 років тому +28

    Don't tempt me to switch my major to mathematics.

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  11 років тому +8

      ***** Perfect reply :)

    • @nahidhkurdi6740
      @nahidhkurdi6740 5 років тому +1

      I Wish I had the opportunity to do so when it was my time!

  • @luismontesdeocafis
    @luismontesdeocafis 5 років тому

    Is a great explanation of a non trivial topic, a wide background is needed but is understood with your guide! Great work! Thank you

  • @harryc2549
    @harryc2549 9 років тому +3

    I love this guy. Always very clear. Great video.

  • @Boomshicleafaunda
    @Boomshicleafaunda 11 років тому +1

    I'm really happy to see a new video on your channel. Numberphile doesn't always go into the same depth as you do on this channel.

  • @philyking
    @philyking 11 років тому +16

    When you say log(x) are you referring to log_e(x)? It seems no one wants to keep consistent notation with it.
    Also, I'm happy you finally did a more intense video, but I find it sort of funny how people are acting like it was a super difficult video when you glossed over all the actual difficult details.
    Even the residue calculations can get horrendous.

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  11 років тому +7

      I sympathise, even the statement is more advance than most people are familiar with. It is the natural log.

  • @javsmo
    @javsmo 11 років тому

    This video summarizes in 20 minutes all odd-numbered chapters of "Prime Obsession". I liked!

  • @tabularasa0606
    @tabularasa0606 11 років тому +4

    Sadly been too long since I did maths like this. I'll leave the proof to you :)

  • @SolPhoebusApollo
    @SolPhoebusApollo 11 років тому

    I can definitely see why people ask you to explain that one. Sucks about no million for disproving the hypothesis. Great return to posting videos! Those formulas hurt my eyes and that's awesome.

  • @rangedfighter
    @rangedfighter 10 років тому +4

    great to see you back with a video :D

  • @Swetlana0
    @Swetlana0 11 років тому +1

    I've always wanted to know what the Riemann Hypothesis was about.
    Thanks for making it a bit more accessible because wikipedia sure isn't helpful!

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  11 років тому +5

      Thanks. I think the choice is a hand-waving explanation or a difficult explanation.

  • @martijnvanweele6204
    @martijnvanweele6204 8 років тому +10

    Why am I even watching this? I understand about as much about math as a banana! ... *continues watching* ....

  • @livinlicious
    @livinlicious 11 років тому

    I NOW understood why 1+2+3...= -1/12.
    When I saw the numberphiles episode it wasnt quite clear, but how you explained it, now its totally clear.

  • @CompuBOOT
    @CompuBOOT 9 років тому +31

    Are you aware that there is a direct correlation between your enthusiasm and emotions attending this explanation and the actual rigor used in the ramping up of your description? It's almost melodious.
    What if numbers and math have human emotive and fantastical elements to them? What if math is an endless song or a dance that we can't sing or sway to because we lack the dimensional articulation? Thus it behooves us to merely express things mathematically using one-dimensional verbal or written symbolic gesturing.
    This idea is only partially reflected in the quiet passion of too few mathematicians or scientists.
    John Nash understood it.

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  9 років тому +20

      ***** Sounds good to me.

    • @doceigen
      @doceigen 9 років тому +5

      +Peter McMillan Agreed. Especially where he spoke about proving that the zeta function has no zeros on the line of the real part of S = 1. Hurrah.
      Likewise from the WIKI, "In a lecture on prime numbers for a general audience, Fields medalist Terence Tao described one approach to proving the prime number theorem in poetic terms: listening to the "music" of the primes. We start with a "sound wave" that is "noisy" at the prime numbers and silent at other numbers; this is the von Mangoldt function. Then we analyze its notes or frequencies by subjecting it to a process akin to Fourier transform; this is the Mellin transform. The next and most difficult step is to prove that certain "notes" cannot occur in this music. This exclusion of certain notes leads to the statement of the prime number theorem. According to Tao, this proof yields much deeper insights into the distribution of the primes than the "elementary" proofs."
      Maths are the tools, but music is the spirt.

    • @donutazarausg1623
      @donutazarausg1623 8 років тому

      +doceigen chaos theory proves the relation between you and me, music and me, mathematics and me, using mathematics.

  • @tkk3852
    @tkk3852 7 років тому

    Good job my brother. If you are still there,thank you. I never understood riemann until today. You made it simple

  • @friedrichhayek3683
    @friedrichhayek3683 4 роки тому +5

    They paying one million dollar for this proof is like me paying 0,15$ for Lobster/Champagne dinner.

  • @sunkhirous
    @sunkhirous 4 роки тому +1

    I’ve solved it since 2010, Peter Sarnak used it to come up with his conjecture and Barry Mazur used it to come up with his and the book on primes ...!!

  • @TomFoster1996
    @TomFoster1996 11 років тому +40

    Could you do a video on each of the clay millennium problems?

    • @cosumel
      @cosumel 5 років тому +5

      This is by far the easiest of the six to understand. The rest of them, particularly P vs NP, are so abstract, just the formulae used to write them require a PhD in migraine medication.

    • @rosskrt
      @rosskrt 2 роки тому

      @@cosumel i know i'm late as you can possibly be, but anyways.
      P vs NP is by far the easiest to explain. You can even explain it to a child. Now try that with the RH.
      It gets abstract and complicated when you start working on it, basically like all the other Millennium Problems.

  • @KannanNambiar
    @KannanNambiar 10 років тому +1

    strikingly beautiful, amazing clarity, please do more

  • @ragnkja
    @ragnkja 11 років тому +3

    The harmonic series sounds nice, at least the first few terms. The seventh is a bit flat, though.

  • @RSLT
    @RSLT Рік тому +2

    Great Video. Very well explained the R.H. principles. Fantastic Job!

  • @hirayahana
    @hirayahana 4 роки тому +4

    What if...the answer to Riemann Hypothesis is the friendship we found along the way?

  • @MadaxeMunkeee
    @MadaxeMunkeee 11 років тому +2

    Wow, this was very easy to follow. Granted, I just got my maths degree and I'm running through a book on the Prime Number Theorem now, but still I think you did a great job. You also gave me more motivation to keep ploughing through all these proofs lol. Thanks!

    • @singingbanana
      @singingbanana  11 років тому +2

      Thanks. This one does have a higher threshold, but you were the ideal viewer!

  • @romanr9883
    @romanr9883 9 років тому +304

    fine ill do it, hold my beer.

    • @aeriumsoft
      @aeriumsoft 8 років тому +21

      i thought you drank soda

    • @abstractapproach634
      @abstractapproach634 7 років тому +13

      Done yet?

    • @markkeilys
      @markkeilys 6 років тому +11

      yo, this beer is getting kinda heavy... or at least the glass is.

    • @王甯-h2x
      @王甯-h2x 6 років тому +9

      30 years later... "Hey father, why are you always holding the beer?" "He's still solving it... Oh my dear"

    • @genericteenager8341
      @genericteenager8341 5 років тому

      Surely OP will deliver

  • @seanoneill2098
    @seanoneill2098 2 роки тому +2

    Thank you, been wondering how complex numbers were needed to do PNT proof, am hoping to learn more about this material

  • @anteaters-R-us
    @anteaters-R-us 8 років тому +9

    he's so adorable

  • @sradtke314159
    @sradtke314159 10 років тому +1

    Excellent lecture - it brings light into a dark place. Quite enjoyable!

  • @RokeyGames
    @RokeyGames 11 років тому +9

    I'm a physics student, I have a lot of math as well and I really like math, but I didn't get any of this :P I still really liked the video. James can really make such a thing really enjoyable!

  • @rubenscabral2657
    @rubenscabral2657 3 роки тому +1

    the number (0) is on the same line because it is a number guard it grows to forget and to the right and the center is still, just observe in the sieve of eratosthenes

  • @trevormugalu3797
    @trevormugalu3797 8 місяців тому +3

    10 years later, I'm still waiting for the proof that cat equals dog and dog equals cat

  • @unvergebeneid
    @unvergebeneid 11 років тому +1

    I think more plots of the various functions would have helped this video to be even more approachable. Also, more repetitions, relating where we are at a given moment to where we started out and where we're going.

  • @oskarp1862
    @oskarp1862 Рік тому +3

    Is it possible that it is true but there is no way of proving it? Or if it is true can we the be sure that it is also possible to prove it?

  • @rubenscabral2657
    @rubenscabral2657 3 роки тому +1

    Goldbach's conjecture works because all odds are even with (1) more and the primes are odd only divided by (1) summed the primes sum (1)(1) which is even

  • @IoEstasCedonta
    @IoEstasCedonta 10 років тому +8

    9:20 - This isn't strictly true, since he didn't explain the restriction that the function must be analytic.

    • @jupytr1
      @jupytr1 10 років тому +1

      Oh, sorry:( I hastily hit a thumbs down on you're comment w/o thinking. You are of course completely right.

  • @sphakamisozondi
    @sphakamisozondi 4 роки тому +1

    Dr James, I think I got a better chance winning the lotto than to win the mathematics millennium prize. I thought I had a shot in solving this hypothesis.

  • @raydredX
    @raydredX 11 років тому +14

    19:17 That's... Lame, I mean I get why, you want to pay the guy for showing up, shake some hands and say some words and being a symbol for the problem. But still that's not how math works, solving the problem means either proving it, disproving it or proving it's "improvability".

  • @davidsimor4271
    @davidsimor4271 9 років тому

    I'm learning about infinite sums at university nowadays im learning chemical engeneering at Budapest. But i just got in love with this kind of maths and i was amazed by riemanns state about the Conditionally convergent sums ! i wish i could count better with complex numbers to do tricks like he did with the dzeta function :D i mean thats amazing that you can get the sums of divergent series i mean if the dzeta function is extended by this way and it has such a huge impact on the real numberline and the prime numbers then i'd say that the sums that can be got out of divergent series can be really useful in other sciences :D!

  • @louischo2701
    @louischo2701 11 років тому +5

    Yay youre making videos again.

  • @chalams
    @chalams 5 років тому +1

    Slowly but surely my love towards mathematics is increasing

  • @LynneSkysong
    @LynneSkysong 11 років тому +23

    I really think it's pretty crappy that you don't get the prize for disproving it. Wouldn't it be funny if someone disproved it and kept it to themself since there wasn't an incentive to share? Of course, that's impossible because anyone that dedicated to mathematics wouldn't be able to keep it a secret.

    • @zzasdfwas
      @zzasdfwas 10 років тому +4

      You'd still be famous.

    • @BobbieTheFish
      @BobbieTheFish 10 років тому +8

      Oh yeah, I forgot to tell everyone, I disproved this years ago. It was so disappointing that I burned down my office with all my research.

    • @rangedfighter
      @rangedfighter 10 років тому

      I'm not 100% sure if he just made this part up or not, or where I could search to get a reference to that fact.

    • @leonardromano1491
      @leonardromano1491 7 років тому +1

      I think you would become the most loved and at the same time most hated person in maths.

    • @mitesh8utube
      @mitesh8utube 4 роки тому

      I guess he meant disapproving with a rigorous proof will get you price. Disputing with a counter example won't.

  • @0730Ender
    @0730Ender 9 років тому +1

    This is certainly the most insightful video I've found on the properties of the Riemann Zeta function. I'd just wished you could go more slowly over some of the steps, but they can be filled in with some effort. Great job!

  • @PrimusProductions
    @PrimusProductions 9 років тому +10

    Define it for quarternions

    • @nahidhkurdi6740
      @nahidhkurdi6740 5 років тому +2

      I had that idea for a while, but it seems that mathematicians proved a Riemann hypothesis for other number systems rather than the quaternions. They had more than a century to think about the idea of extension to quaternions had it been that fruitful. You should know, however, that even the very concept of an analytic function will not emerge unscathed when you extend your definitions to quaternions.

  • @SiMyt848
    @SiMyt848 11 років тому +1

    Thank you! I spend a lot of time speaking with my classmates (we are studing maths) about the series 1+2+3+... after the numberphile's video. I refuse their 2 "proof" (because I lerned in analysis 1 that 1-1+1-1+... doesn't converge, so it isn't equals to 1/2 and in the second video they set -1 in a formula (coming from a geometric series) where |x|

  • @lolzomgz1337
    @lolzomgz1337 9 років тому +46

    11:23 -1/12?!
    NOT AGAIN!!!!!

  • @99hourvideos
    @99hourvideos 10 років тому

    Ok, it took me a few minutes of goggling to realize you're not "Numberphile", just a part of it! But let me tell you, you MAKE Numberphile what it is! Love your enthusiasm and videos!

  • @ashley2khoo510
    @ashley2khoo510 7 років тому +6

    Fermat be like: i know the proof. But this margin is too small to write it down

    • @evalsoftserver
      @evalsoftserver 3 роки тому

      A Solution for the RIEMANN ZETA FUNCTION is extremely valuable because It also point to Solutions for enhancing the HAMILTON GEOMETRZATION Poincare conjecture, Hodge Invariance conjecture as it relates to PRIME NUMBERS, TAYLOR INFINITE SERIES ,MACULIN SERIES and Doing Arithmetic past ZERO or Singularity as it is called in Analytic Geometry , and Algebraic Geometry, and it Directly points to the Prime factorization Algorithm , the Division algorithm, and the QUADRIATIC FORMULA This Solves many DIMENSIONS and RANK IN THE COMPLEX FUNCTION PLANE for MANIFOLD like The Kahler MANIFOLD ,CALIBU YAU MANIFOLD simeoustanesly and Points to Soulutions to the entire Millennium Prize Problems proposed by The Early 20th Century Philospher and Mathematician David HILBERT , Including the YANG-MILL Mass GAP , and the NP COMPUTATION time space COMPLEXITY problem also know as the Traveling Salesman problem

  • @philipmylan654
    @philipmylan654 11 років тому

    Even though I didn't understand this enough to understand the Riemann Hypothesis, I still learned a lot from it. More of this so-called 'maths' stuff, please! :)

  • @autodidactusplaysjrpgs7614
    @autodidactusplaysjrpgs7614 8 років тому +4

    That x = 0.5 line is called in some circles 'the dirty crease.' Modern maths seeks to know how dirty the crease really is. Get at it.

  • @Scy
    @Scy 9 років тому +2

    This is the first time I've heard of there NOT being a prize for disproving it. Every numberphile video talking about millennium problems say there's a prize for proving OR disproving. Though I can see how disproving this one would turn mathematics into a cesspool of self doubt and introspection for some years to follow.

  • @JamesSpeiser
    @JamesSpeiser 8 років тому +8

    Looking at graphs of Riemann Zeta, would it be wrong to infer there are some fractal properties of primes?

    • @amirabudubai2279
      @amirabudubai2279 8 років тому +4

      Probably, but you should rephrase that to prime properties of fractals. Primes show up in almost every aspect of math; at this point it would be more impressive to prove something is not related to the primes.

  • @YiannisANO1911
    @YiannisANO1911 4 роки тому +1

    the fact that i dont understand what you are saying makes my depression come back. I genuinely just want to know what mathematicians are talking about but i think as soon as i graduated high school i lost that skill

  • @peterbarber716
    @peterbarber716 11 років тому +4

    2:14"…prove that black equals white…"
    And get run over on the next zebra crossing? NOOOOOO!!!

  • @huwpickrell1209
    @huwpickrell1209 4 роки тому +2

    I have actually written a proof for this hypothesis however the margins in this comments section are too small for me to write it down 🙂

  • @Zedriodor
    @Zedriodor 11 років тому +5

    "...all line on the line..."

  • @paul1964uk
    @paul1964uk 11 років тому +1

    Thank you James. This was a wonderful talk. It got me starting and stopping the tape excitedly and along the way you succeeded in filling some gaps in my understanding of this all-important problem. (Priceless!) Riemann was a part-time number theorist you say? But then he only stated the problem and couldn't hang around long (poor chap.)

  • @kansuerdem2799
    @kansuerdem2799 8 років тому +91

    I finally have the proof. Only this textbox is too narrow to contain...!!!

    • @JannikPitt
      @JannikPitt 8 років тому

      +Kansu Erdem haha :D

    • @Czeckie
      @Czeckie 8 років тому +1

      +Kansu Erdem publish it then

    • @TheSnump3r
      @TheSnump3r 8 років тому +14

      +gravity0529 it's a reference to fermats last theorem...

    • @JannikPitt
      @JannikPitt 8 років тому +3

      ***** Dude that was a joke, he didn't mean it like that - look up "Fermats Last Theorem"

    • @Czeckie
      @Czeckie 8 років тому +11

      JANNIK | The world through my camera
      thank you for the explanation, I haven't known that. Now I see the foolishness of my response, which was ignorant and unfunny. Thank you for showing me the light. This very moment will guide me for the rest of my life; I will remember you, kind stranger, everytime I face hardship. You've done much more than merely pointing out a single fact; now I finally can see what kind of person I want to become and grow.