The Riemann Hypothesis, Explained

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 19 кві 2024
  • The Riemann Hypothesis is the most notorious unsolved problem in all of mathematics. Ever since it was first proposed by Bernhard Riemann in 1859, the conjecture has maintained the status of the "Holy Grail" of mathematics. In fact, the person who solves it will win a $1 million prize from the Clay Institute of Mathematics. So, what is the Riemann hypothesis? Why is it so important? What can it tell us about the chaotic universe of prime numbers? And why is its proof so elusive? Alex Kontorovich, professor of mathematics at Rutgers University, breaks it all down in this comprehensive explainer.
    00:00 A glimpse into the mystery of the Riemann Hypothesis
    01:42 The world of prime numbers
    02:30 Carl Friedrich Gauss looks for primes, Prime Counting Function
    03:30 Logarithm Function and Gauss's Conjecture
    04:39 Leonard Euler and infinite series
    06:30 Euler and the Zeta Function
    07:30 Bernhard Riemann enters the prime number picture
    08:18 Imaginary and complex numbers
    09:40 Complex Analysis and the Zeta Function
    10:25 Analytic Continuation: two functions at work at once
    11:14 Zeta Zeros and the critical strip
    12:20 The critical line
    12:51 Why the Riemann's Hypothesis has a profound consequence to number theory
    13:04 Riemann's Hypothesis shows the distribution of prime numbers can be predicted
    14:59 The search for a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis
    Read more at Quanta Magazine: www.quantamagazine.org/how-i-...
    - VISIT our Website: www.quantamagazine.org
    - LIKE us on Facebook: / quantanews
    - FOLLOW us Twitter: / quantamagazine
    Quanta Magazine is an editorially independent publication supported by the Simons Foundation: www.simonsfoundation.org/
  • Наука та технологія

КОМЕНТАРІ • 7 тис.

  • @kabauny
    @kabauny 3 роки тому +15766

    My math professor once said, “I’ve know the existence of these math problems for many years. And I assure you, there are a lot easier ways to make a million dollars”

    • @kolbasz3584
      @kolbasz3584 3 роки тому +306

      lmaoo

    • @salerio61
      @salerio61 3 роки тому +743

      One has already been done - and the prize turned down. Fermat's last theorem would have been a Clay Institute award but was solved before the prizes were offered, but Andrew Wiles has received prizes approaching £3 million and a knighthood which isn't so bad really.

    • @fadyssiebzehn6261
      @fadyssiebzehn6261 3 роки тому +80

      did you asked how to the professor?

    • @philippebaillargeon5204
      @philippebaillargeon5204 3 роки тому +78

      I like your teacher

    • @kruth6663
      @kruth6663 3 роки тому +749

      Compared to such an achievement, a million dollars feels so trivial it's almost humiliating.

  • @weimondo
    @weimondo 3 роки тому +13198

    I have discovered a truly marvellous proof of this, but it's much too large for this youtube comment to contain. Therefore it is left as an exercise to the reader.

    • @Macitron3000
      @Macitron3000 3 роки тому +1406

      Omg Fermat no! You can’t do that!!

    • @derFeind
      @derFeind 3 роки тому +491

      this is the way.

    • @Piccolo_Sun
      @Piccolo_Sun 3 роки тому +96

      me too

    • @satnamo
      @satnamo 3 роки тому +73

      Rh is true because I/2

    • @DavidMcCoul
      @DavidMcCoul 3 роки тому +94

      Pft. Whatever, Fermat.

  • @matthewblanchard7823
    @matthewblanchard7823 Рік тому +2379

    This is like becoming an astronaut, discovering a previously unknown planet, finding a river on that planet, and at the bottom of the river is the perfectly fitting other half to a broken rock you found in a river on Earth as a kid. The Universe sees the look on your face and laughs silently.

    • @reyliw
      @reyliw Рік тому +116

      That's what I call a good trip.

    • @ramaraksha01
      @ramaraksha01 Рік тому +22

      This is stupid - there is no magic man laughing at us - stop with these childish ideas

    • @luceatlux7087
      @luceatlux7087 Рік тому +64

      It' has always been plain that we're dealing with a partialy identified/defined state of existence.
      Everything we see are aspects of a whole that we have not yet put together. We know this because reality is currently completely unclear and objectively (essentially) meaningless to us. The fractal isn't yet plotted (It may never be).
      When we see the truth of material existence, all answers will suddenly fit together and fill out the description of the whole, seamlessly.

    • @vignesh1065
      @vignesh1065 Рік тому +196

      @@ramaraksha01 He never mentioned a magic man.

    • @ramaraksha01
      @ramaraksha01 Рік тому

      @@vignesh1065 The universe is inanimate - it is dead - it is not alive to be laughing at us. What he is saying is God created all this and is laughing at us for our stupidity

  • @evelyntromp789
    @evelyntromp789 Рік тому +1898

    I really appreciate that you explain the more “basic” things (e.g. what a log function is). It makes the video feel welcoming to people who aren’t necessary very good at math (like me, lol)

    • @emigoldber
      @emigoldber Рік тому +5

      nice pun

    • @thefishreloaded
      @thefishreloaded Рік тому +6

      @@emigoldber i dont even think it was intended but it is pretty good

    • @faiqkhan7545
      @faiqkhan7545 Рік тому +27

      Log function is just a reverse function of exponential function.
      (Inverse I mean)

    • @EK-bn7jz
      @EK-bn7jz Рік тому +13

      yeah but then other parts of it they just brush over like it's nothing

    • @erikhalvorseth3950
      @erikhalvorseth3950 Рік тому +3

      True, Evelyn. That can be a challenge for truly gifted matematicians- to level down and communicate on ‘lower’ levels. The author shows some pedagogical talent here

  • @artisorak
    @artisorak 3 роки тому +4761

    Proving the Riemann Hypothesis is probably one of the hardest ways to make a million dollars.

    • @aemi_sa
      @aemi_sa 3 роки тому +82

      hahaha true i'll be doing forex

    • @shutup4483
      @shutup4483 3 роки тому +70

      investing in gamestop is harder

    • @aemi_sa
      @aemi_sa 3 роки тому +112

      @@shutup4483 you are right. but would u stop calling it an investment pls XD

    • @PepeLePewPew
      @PepeLePewPew 3 роки тому +17

      @@shutup4483 you are 6 weeks to late

    • @brunovaz
      @brunovaz 3 роки тому +15

      yeah we watched the numberphile video too

  • @chasedenecke6831
    @chasedenecke6831 3 роки тому +7182

    Whoever does these animations, massive props to you. These are literally the best math illustrations I've ever seen.

    • @eishaspeaks9590
      @eishaspeaks9590 3 роки тому +27

      i was just going to add that, until i observed your comment.

    • @hansmeiser32
      @hansmeiser32 3 роки тому +177

      well, then you probably don't know 3Blue1Brown

    • @mikopiko
      @mikopiko 3 роки тому +93

      @@hansmeiser32 Both are good at what they are doing

    • @md.salahuddinparvez6578
      @md.salahuddinparvez6578 3 роки тому +50

      The animations here are really awesome. But 3B1B is still the best.

    • @EPMTUNES
      @EPMTUNES 3 роки тому +19

      3blue1brown is worth checking out too!

  • @mikerawaan1444
    @mikerawaan1444 Рік тому +600

    For the first time in my 46 years, I have truly understood what the Riemann Hypothesis actually is. Thank you!

    • @fex144
      @fex144 Рік тому +10

      Fully understood? I'm about your age Mike. When we got to the zero-to-one boundary i went - huh? what? that continued onward.

    • @andyc9902
      @andyc9902 Рік тому +1

      Never stop learning. Coz people live up to 75 years

    • @whatsoup
      @whatsoup Рік тому +59

      @@andyc9902 wait until you hear about 76 year olds

    • @andyc9902
      @andyc9902 Рік тому

      @@whatsoup they should prepare for the death. Unlike 46 year old

    • @sarah-1
      @sarah-1 Рік тому +3

      I’m 17 and i really want to understand it but i didn’t. Can you please explain what you’ve understood

  • @whatthepi
    @whatthepi Рік тому +704

    I'm amazed by Riemann, Euler, Gauss and other mathematicians/physicists how their brain and curiousity for math and science managed to find these sort of algorithm and new fundamentals that we even use today. Amazing vid, love your animations!

    • @franzrogar
      @franzrogar Рік тому +64

      Be even more amazed when remember that they died before even the electric light was made available to public. Let's not talk then about mechanical calculators...

    • @franzrogar
      @franzrogar Рік тому +14

      @@k-force8325 yes, they had what is called "mechanical calculators", which is something like an automated abacus via gears. And they were HUGE (in modern standards) and WEIGHTED a ton... For example, you have the "Pascaline" built by Blaise Pascal, and it was an "Arithmetic Machine" in 1642.

    • @manavshah8335
      @manavshah8335 9 місяців тому +2

      @@franzrogar there were even massive mechanical computers that calculated calculus, much before the small pocket sized scientific calcultors we carry nowdays

    • @franzrogar
      @franzrogar 9 місяців тому +2

      @@manavshah8335 I know, I wrote about them in the post I sent 5 months ago before the one you wrote 2 days ago...

    • @rolodexter
      @rolodexter 8 місяців тому +1

      I agree, Riemann, Euler, Gauss, and other mathematicians and physicists are truly amazing. Their work has had a profound impact on our understanding of the world, and their discoveries are still being used today.
      I'm glad you enjoyed the video! I put a lot of work into the animations, and I'm always happy to hear that people enjoy them.
      I think one of the things that makes these mathematicians so special is their curiosity. They were always asking questions and trying to understand the world around them. They were also very creative, and they were able to come up with new and innovative ways to solve problems.

  • @joserojas9876
    @joserojas9876 2 роки тому +3675

    Thank you, Quanta Magazine. My understanding of the Riemann Hypothesis went from 0% to 15%. Great job (I mean it).

    • @brrrrrrruh
      @brrrrrrruh Рік тому +216

      15%? sheesh, i guess ur a bit off by about +14.999997%

    • @Artist_of_Imagination
      @Artist_of_Imagination Рік тому +106

      @@brrrrrrruh Spoken like a true mathematician

    • @brrrrrrruh
      @brrrrrrruh Рік тому +9

      @@Artist_of_Imagination true

    • @fex144
      @fex144 Рік тому +33

      15%? more like 2% - for me anyway

    • @tedkaczynskiamericanhero3916
      @tedkaczynskiamericanhero3916 Рік тому +40

      15% is great.
      I'm pretty close to being able to say the name!

  • @setmason1510
    @setmason1510 3 роки тому +1503

    hold my beer, I got one A in math in high school, I got this

    • @farerse
      @farerse 3 роки тому +18

      ur getting the million prize?

    • @farerse
      @farerse 3 роки тому +76

      no I think the person who will solve this will not drink beer .. but rather some sophisticated tea

    • @DAVIEYKE
      @DAVIEYKE 3 роки тому +46

      Hold my bong water, i got a shocking suprise in math, I've got bees

    • @cv507
      @cv507 3 роки тому +1

      i got ^ ^
      base course -.-

    • @robmendell6338
      @robmendell6338 3 роки тому +25

      There is already one A in Math.

  • @hallu6666
    @hallu6666 Рік тому +447

    When pure mathematics comes with lucid explanations, and the two are complemented by a perfect vanilla icing of aesthetic graphics. A million thanks for this amazing presentation.

  • @perseusgeorgiadis7821
    @perseusgeorgiadis7821 Рік тому +46

    Watched this a few months back. A few months of studying maths rigorously later, and I can finally start to appreciate how magnificent this is

    • @SublimeWeasel
      @SublimeWeasel 8 місяців тому

      you inspired me, magic man. gonna do the same

    • @mafhim62
      @mafhim62 3 місяці тому

      @@SublimeWeasel
      Hey , How it’s going ?

    • @SublimeWeasel
      @SublimeWeasel 3 місяці тому +3

      @@mafhim62 hi. I didn't study math rigorously. Other than that, meh. You?

    • @mafhim62
      @mafhim62 3 місяці тому

      @@SublimeWeasel
      I did , I failed the first three times, but succeeded the fourth!
      If you ever need help I am here for you

    • @SublimeWeasel
      @SublimeWeasel 3 місяці тому

      @@mafhim62thank you. though, what do you mean by "failed the first three times"? what did you even try to do? im now imagining you soving the entire math itself in 4 tries lol

  • @southbayjay2540
    @southbayjay2540 3 роки тому +5115

    Literally if my math teacher had just said “logarithms are to exponents what division is to multiplication,” I would have had much less trouble with them. Thanks dude

    • @InfluxDecline
      @InfluxDecline 3 роки тому +193

      It's a bit more complicated than that, though, because exponents have roots as well.

    • @kashu7691
      @kashu7691 3 роки тому +53

      @@jdeep7 idk what that guy is talking about with roots but I guess the complex logarithm isn't a well defined function since there are infinitely many possible imaginary parts for a given input

    • @InfluxDecline
      @InfluxDecline 3 роки тому +105

      @@jdeep7 Exponents and powers are often taught in school as the same thing, and the inverse of a power function is a root. Is the reverse of 2^3=8 cbrt(8)=2, or is it log2(8)=3?

    • @jeffkunkler3842
      @jeffkunkler3842 3 роки тому +1

      right?!

    • @AsheeshGupta1978
      @AsheeshGupta1978 3 роки тому +36

      Pretty sure teacher himself did not know that

  • @harshadsalunke1580
    @harshadsalunke1580 3 роки тому +2092

    Reimann, gauss, euler and all other guys did all this stuff without matplotlib😳
    I can't even imagine the extent of their hardwork and dedication

    • @dwightk.schrute8696
      @dwightk.schrute8696 3 роки тому +374

      one has to wonder what those people might be able to achieve with modern technology

    • @sebaitor
      @sebaitor 3 роки тому +57

      matplotlib omegalol

    • @wil8785
      @wil8785 3 роки тому +196

      @@dwightk.schrute8696 they would probably all use Pascal and create their own framesworks because the other ones, "don't do exactly what I want"

    • @computerfis
      @computerfis 3 роки тому +16

      @@wil8785 python?

    • @jakubszczesnowicz3201
      @jakubszczesnowicz3201 3 роки тому +177

      @@dwightk.schrute8696 Python would make Gauss unstoppable oh my god

  • @neurofiber2406
    @neurofiber2406 Рік тому +39

    I can't believe I understood this.
    I've heard about this for years, but this is the first explanation I've seen that makes sense.
    Great video.

  • @mr.smitdineshbhaiboraniya8288
    @mr.smitdineshbhaiboraniya8288 Рік тому +50

    Hats off to Kontorovich sir. He explained such a complicated topic in a very simple manner. I just want to develop this skill.

    • @RSLT
      @RSLT Рік тому +1

      100% agree

  • @marcellocapone4925
    @marcellocapone4925 3 роки тому +1842

    There's a janitor in Boston who I think could take a crack at it.

  • @yunooooo_
    @yunooooo_ 2 роки тому +2561

    Can I just appreciate how well the animation is? Literally, WOW.

  • @deldarel
    @deldarel 6 місяців тому +7

    This video goes so well with the 3blue1brown one. It explains the Riemann zeta function in more detail and helps you get an actual feel of the 0's, especially the trivial ones.
    But like all other Riemann zeta function videos I've seen before, they say 'it's important for primes' and refuse to elaborate.
    NOW I understand, thank you!
    At least, I understand enough to appreciate it. I've wanted this for so long. Thanks, once again! Also I never appreciated how much of the Riemann hypothesis was actually done by Riemann himself. What a juggernaut! I thought he laid the foundation and it stopped with 'I think the zeroes are on 0.5' and that someone later realised the connection with primes.

  • @ADPuckey
    @ADPuckey 4 місяці тому +2

    I love this video! The explanation of the hypothesis itself is great, with all the right context and friendly explanations, but more importantly I've never seen such a concise yet captivating description of why the hypothesis matters

  • @ClemensAlive
    @ClemensAlive 2 роки тому +2167

    WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE?!
    Mathematicians: "No thanks..."

    • @pawfulpurrr
      @pawfulpurrr 2 роки тому +33

      Rieman hypothesis solved by a indian

    • @ramesh.pikkili6886
      @ramesh.pikkili6886 2 роки тому +3

      It solved by telugu man in india

    • @kyranstoecklin726
      @kyranstoecklin726 2 роки тому +3

      @@wassilywsky6333 omg it WAS solved! That is so amazing

    • @cricketfan4089
      @cricketfan4089 2 роки тому +4

      Recently a guy from india solved this

    • @atlasbailly5439
      @atlasbailly5439 2 роки тому +6

      @Chepanu gaka chepanu cambridge university? i thought they were from cambridge, massachusetts?
      also according to the clay mathematical institute, the problem is still unsolved and opened. i dont yet have the math skills to evaluate his proof myself, but it seems that his proof is not based solely on analytical mathematics (which is the point of the millenium problems, no?)

  • @petes2424
    @petes2424 3 роки тому +1127

    Me: It's been a long day, let's watch some light-minded vid.
    UA-cam: How bout Riemann Hypothesis?

  • @scottekim
    @scottekim Рік тому +10

    Just discovering the Quanta math videos. These are my new favorite math explainer videos because - they take on difficult mathematics that I actually want to know about, explain it thoroughly and artfully, with stunning animation that is both entertaining and very well thought out, and makes it all seem easy and inevitable. And having a narrator who has a great voice AND is a personable mathematician seals the deal.

  • @napalm5
    @napalm5 8 місяців тому +1

    This is a truly fantastic video. The gradual exposition to the very casual person interested in maths is top notch

  • @mptyyegdlc
    @mptyyegdlc 3 роки тому +1267

    I have watched countless videos about the Riemann Hypothesis, the Riemann's Zeta function, etc. And this is only one that actually explains the connecction between this function and the distribution of prime numbers. The harmonics part has never been explained to me before. Well done, now I can finally truly understand why this is such a big deal for mathematicians. Well done!

    • @lesliekollerprivate5062
      @lesliekollerprivate5062 2 роки тому +8

      I was just thinking exactly the same about this video in particular, an and I've watched hundreds of vids and read dozens of books.

    • @davidhelmut26
      @davidhelmut26 2 роки тому +27

      it has to do with fourier analysis. because the function with the log of the primes can be written in another way so that the part where you put in the zeta zeros has a cosine. that means that every zero is like a wave. and if you add all those waves together you get this function in 14:26

    • @gardendado1999
      @gardendado1999 2 роки тому +11

      it is kinda ironic for a musician like me to watch a random math video and hear harmonics mentioned, like what if all the math mental gymnastics is reducible to waves and harmonics ?

    • @user-yl7wn2fz1t
      @user-yl7wn2fz1t 2 роки тому +2

      Indeed.

    • @dshepherd107
      @dshepherd107 2 роки тому +4

      @@gardendado1999 I think Pythagorus might have a bone to pic w/ you on that one.

  • @JS-rt7kp
    @JS-rt7kp 3 роки тому +501

    If there was a video like this for every math concept, I would never take my eyes off the computer screen.

    • @juggerswood
      @juggerswood 3 роки тому +5

      Then you'd be dead.

    • @lectrix8
      @lectrix8 3 роки тому +23

      This is how all math concepts should be taught

    • @rrrrrrrrrr9354
      @rrrrrrrrrr9354 3 роки тому +28

      have you heard of 3blue1brown?

    • @miguelcorreia6357
      @miguelcorreia6357 3 роки тому

      u virgin?

    • @johndavid477
      @johndavid477 3 роки тому +1

      @@miguelcorreia6357
      > "u virgin?"
      > "Cyka Blyat Man"

  • @paullogeman9189
    @paullogeman9189 8 місяців тому +5

    A clear and concise presentation on a challenging topic.

  • @CosmosNut
    @CosmosNut Рік тому +15

    Well done! Great animations go a very long way to illuminating the discussion which is as relatively simple and clear as possible. Thank you.

    • @kathrynhunter9537
      @kathrynhunter9537 Рік тому

      It's not integers it's decimal integers I solved this in high school I was a mathematical genius

  • @s3cr3tpassword
    @s3cr3tpassword 3 роки тому +797

    This is literally the best video on UA-cam explaining why the Rieman hypothesis is related to the prime numbers and why proving it is so important. Other videos only briefly mentions that it's important because the 'prime number distribution is encoded in the function', like bruh that doesnt explain it enough. This video also beautifully shows how anaylitcal continuation works.

    • @lilapela
      @lilapela 3 роки тому +22

      Yeauh my mind was blown when they shouwed the harmonic sums converging

    • @EduardodaSilva00
      @EduardodaSilva00 3 роки тому +12

      This video also has some beautiful animations and historical informations. I love to understand math with context and this video makes a great job!

    • @timothyelicada2630
      @timothyelicada2630 3 роки тому +1

      Agree

    • @asdsa7434
      @asdsa7434 3 роки тому +24

      Not really I felt like this didn't explain much for those with some background in Maths, and is prob still too difficult for those without a background to understand. But can't really blame the video since it's only 15 min long

    • @metawarp7446
      @metawarp7446 3 роки тому

      I wonder what they do with the Riemann hypothesis in quantum physics research...

  • @yerivalpolanco1448
    @yerivalpolanco1448 3 роки тому +378

    This is one of the reasons I am so grateful I learned english so young. There are few non english spaces where I can find such great content.

    • @calix451
      @calix451 3 роки тому +4

      You are so right!

    • @James-un8io
      @James-un8io 3 роки тому +6

      what's your first language

    • @yerivalpolanco1448
      @yerivalpolanco1448 3 роки тому +8

      @@James-un8io Español

    • @rfak7696
      @rfak7696 3 роки тому +7

      I know how you feel. It's very hard to find content as well explained in any other languages (native portuguese speaker)

    • @MrAlRats
      @MrAlRats 3 роки тому +13

      It makes me sad to think of all the people in the world who don't know English. It's a huge disadvantage that they may not even fully appreciate themselves. There are so many great books and documentaries in English. It's not quite as bad as living in a war torn country with no access to running water or electricity, but still pretty bad in terms of the opportunities that it robs you of.

  • @Leevay
    @Leevay 7 місяців тому +6

    Insanely well animated and absolutely essential to understand the connection between the topics presented. Props!

  • @scottk7515
    @scottk7515 6 місяців тому +9

    I've watched many videos on the Riemann Zeta function, but this one is now my favorite. It connects to the primes beautifully. Alex, you've done the world a wonderful service. Thank you!

  • @DanielPetri
    @DanielPetri 3 роки тому +7261

    this is next level content

  • @willh69
    @willh69 3 роки тому +1396

    cool man, I think I'll solve this over my lunch break

    • @earthling_parth
      @earthling_parth 3 роки тому +33

      Did you do it? :P

    • @willh69
      @willh69 3 роки тому +340

      @@earthling_parth yep, working on it!
      My conclusion thus far is that this burger needs more sauce

    • @earthling_parth
      @earthling_parth 2 роки тому +62

      @@willh69 wow, great progress dude. Let me know when you reach to the state of pineapples and bananas on pizza 😆

    • @commentsanitizer7929
      @commentsanitizer7929 2 роки тому +5

      Overconfident jokes

    • @monstrellsf-w8277
      @monstrellsf-w8277 2 роки тому +45

      @@commentsanitizer7929 OvErCoNFiDeNt JoKeS 😡🤬🥵🥵🥵

  • @matthewblanchard7823
    @matthewblanchard7823 Рік тому +1

    Incredible. The reveal when all the harmonics are added in and its the primes is fantastic.

  • @CarstenSpraner
    @CarstenSpraner Рік тому +8

    Thank you so much! If I had these videos during my mathematics studies it would really be more fun. And surely result in more passion.

    • @Nathan-dt2tu
      @Nathan-dt2tu Рік тому

      If the math itself isn't enough to bring out your passion, what would attracting a bunch of lay people to the field accomplish? You'd get even more morons like Terry whatshisname who insists on Terryology, where 1*1 = 2, just because he couldn't understand basic grade 1 math.

  • @rizalpurnawan3796
    @rizalpurnawan3796 3 роки тому +779

    "If I were to awaken after having slept for a thousand of years, my first question would be; 'has the Riemann Hypothesis been proven?'."
    - David Hilbert

    • @nicbajitogaming8947
      @nicbajitogaming8947 3 роки тому +40

      "The 3 dolar problems that kids play with it?" Hahaha

    • @frankfox4366
      @frankfox4366 3 роки тому +20

      I think I would want to piss before anything else.

    • @shobhitsharma3263
      @shobhitsharma3263 3 роки тому

      Amazing Tarot Card Reading.
      Is Anandi Dhawan Dead/Alive ??

    • @shobhitsharma3263
      @shobhitsharma3263 3 роки тому

      Amazing Tarot Card Reading.
      Is Anandi Dhawan Dead/Alive ??

    • @proximacentaur1654
      @proximacentaur1654 3 роки тому +1

      I'd probably want a coffee before tackling anything complicated.

  • @neogen23
    @neogen23 3 роки тому +497

    I know very little about mathematics yet I was able to keep up with this video till the end. That's a rare talent you've got there, explaining such advanced concepts in plain English. Thank you!

    • @NomadUrpagi
      @NomadUrpagi 3 роки тому +16

      That is the talent only the TRUE professors posess. Feynman and sagan were like this.

    • @Deadshot-kq5zk
      @Deadshot-kq5zk 3 роки тому +3

      Yeah it sounded nice

    • @blastbottles
      @blastbottles Рік тому

      Bro ur name is math

  • @apoorvmishra6992
    @apoorvmishra6992 Рік тому +31

    Being from an engineering background, even I understood the hypothesis. Your video was unbelievably awesome.

    • @johndododoe1411
      @johndododoe1411 9 місяців тому +3

      Ditto, though for some steps I would have loved rigorous definitions instead of pattern animations .

  • @fernando3670rocha
    @fernando3670rocha Рік тому +37

    I loved this video and the math explanations. I could like it 10 times if possible. Great explanation. That is an example of how math should be taught. I am an engineer and at university I had a few good professors, but no professor was as good as this video.

  • @avasapphic
    @avasapphic 3 роки тому +993

    You just made mathematics fun, I understood only half of it but the video was great, glad I discovered your channel! :)

    • @metawarp7446
      @metawarp7446 3 роки тому +10

      Have you seen Numberphile? That's a pretty fun math's channel.
      Oh and Vihart is relly great too.
      But this video was indeed really fun, I'm also happy about the discovery :^)

    • @Asdfgfdmn
      @Asdfgfdmn 3 роки тому

      What is the music name at 2:35?

    • @wartupper
      @wartupper 3 роки тому +1

      @dota vinkz I don't mean to be rude but you really do not know nothing about maths, maths is all about creativity, there's no blame in being illiterate about maths, but you should really gotta dive deeper than the horrid algorithmic approach that is present in most engineering courses and high school ones. Logic is beautiful, fun and creative and the best examples are Gödel completeness theorem. Maths are beautiful and creative.

    • @arghya4NE
      @arghya4NE 3 роки тому +1

      @dota vinkz fun is an human emotion encountered when truly performing a task you are best equipped to do so..in one sense fun follows satisfaction ..it has no fixed origin and can be obtained from myriad of sources ..depends on the individual
      And maths is creative if you let it be..

    • @arghya4NE
      @arghya4NE 3 роки тому

      @@stower1999 yup I bet in the future if we are successful in creating artificial intelligence constructs ..they would comment human beings being subjective while dealing with objective problems

  • @business5292
    @business5292 3 роки тому +699

    Probably the clay institute should start adjusting that prize for inflation.

    • @jondunmore4268
      @jondunmore4268 3 роки тому +106

      Y'know, if they made it two million dollars, I might just attempt to solve it.

    • @Jackieception
      @Jackieception 3 роки тому +4

      @@jondunmore4268 thanks for the laugh man that got me :D

    • @david50665
      @david50665 3 роки тому +35

      $1 million is a humiliating amount for answering a problem that defies centuries of effort from the best minds in mathematics and is tied to the foundations of cryptography and quantum mechanics. But that is where the priorities of mankind lie in the 21st century. And if you say otherwise u must be a socialist and against free markets. Yes there are easier ways to make money for sure

    • @codycast
      @codycast 3 роки тому +19

      @@david50665 the person / team that solves this isn’t going to be motivated by the $1m. Or an increase. Making it $10m or $100m wouldn’t likely make it solved faster.
      But you’re right. What normie cares if this is solved? Does it impact their life?

    • @david50665
      @david50665 3 роки тому +5

      @@codycast I know that but it's a matter of respect and society's priorities...i would prefer if we apply your logic on other fields such as athletes, entrepreneurs, movie stars etc...in theory they should all do it because they love what they do... not because someone throw them a peanut like a monkey...due to market efficiencies, it seems only frivolous work can be well compensated

  • @samcoding
    @samcoding 5 місяців тому +1

    The production quality of this content is insane.

  • @omarnassery7280
    @omarnassery7280 3 місяці тому

    As a non-mathematician, I gained so much insight from this one short video! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

  • @gregrodd8936
    @gregrodd8936 3 роки тому +388

    For those who saw Beautiful Mind, this was the puzzle Nash was working on at the end of the movie. There is a Dover book from Edwards, "Reimann's Zeta Function". 305 pp. The first 25 pages explain Reimann's original 8 page paper. The rest of the book tackles developments since 1859 (up to 1974). Edward's book is presented as a guide to the primary sources. If you saw "The Man Who Knew Infinity", Hardy and Ramanujan also did work related to the conjecture. Turing also worked on the problem, taking a computational approach. Just so you know the competition and how it relates to nerd culture. I get stuck just trying to draw a Greek Zeta.

    • @Mrpallekuling
      @Mrpallekuling 3 роки тому +12

      Edwards has written several great books, not only this one but also books like Galois Theory and Fermat's Last Theorem. They are not easy, but if you put in some work, you'll find the beauty of mathematics. Edwards died November 10, 2020, 84 years old.

    • @fntime
      @fntime 3 роки тому +5

      This didn't work well for John Nash, he's a crazy quilt. He's weird looking
      nothing like Russell Crowe.

    • @craffte
      @craffte 3 роки тому +1

      Ok fr best comment

    • @riddhimanna8437
      @riddhimanna8437 3 роки тому +1

      Heyy thanks I didn't know this book existed!

    • @surgeonmd729
      @surgeonmd729 3 роки тому +5

      Trauma Surgeon
      There's another very good book, entitled "Prime Obsession" that alternates chapters on the theory with biographical chapters on Riemann. If you love math, it's a wonderful book. Highly recommended.

  • @sarmadinho
    @sarmadinho 3 роки тому +457

    I think you deserve $1 million just for explaining this hypothesis in a clear and understandable language. Well done!

    • @NomadUrpagi
      @NomadUrpagi 3 роки тому +5

      Numberphile also did it REALLY well.

    • @typo691
      @typo691 3 роки тому +4

      3blue1brown has only animated it quite well

    • @MichaelMonterey
      @MichaelMonterey 3 роки тому +3

      Unfortunately, despite the rhetoric, most maths pros, like Riemann himself, really don't want know why R's zeta formula functions as it does, nor why RH remained unsolved for more than 157 years. Also, like Riemann, nor do they want to learn or do anything other than what they are doing inside The Box of the current paradigm of their fave maths niche. If that were untrue Riemann could have solved RH--IFF he could've gotten out of his tumnel-vision syndrome (& outa The Box). Also, if the culture of current maths was not allergic to superior theory & metatheory of maths & logic it would be easy to get my proofs reviewed, published & verified. As is, that's almost impossible. Sigh...seems a shame to let 21 years of good work and next-gen maths go to waste. Oh, well...humanity is clearly stuck with a culture of cowardice, conceit & corruption. So, i guess we're doomed. So, nothing matters. Rite?

    • @jwust1n
      @jwust1n 3 роки тому +5

      @@MichaelMonterey among us

    • @MichaelMonterey
      @MichaelMonterey 3 роки тому +2

      @@jwust1n > Hi. Thanks for noticing. Yet thats a bit cryptic. Care to expand your comment?

  • @Aniki_chan69
    @Aniki_chan69 Рік тому +1

    By seeing this video the way we think maths varies differently from region to region and place to place that makes it beauty ful

  • @akdkdjsjskdnfn
    @akdkdjsjskdnfn 3 роки тому +163

    someone give the animators a raise; kept me interested throughout the vid

    • @craffte
      @craffte 3 роки тому +1

      I like the guy's voice, too. Interesting and not patronizing.
      If he narrated my life, I might try.

  • @deepstariaenigmatica2601
    @deepstariaenigmatica2601 3 роки тому +466

    Keep pumping out content like this. Love the level of detail & creativity in these videos.

    • @MikhailFederov
      @MikhailFederov 3 роки тому +2

      Me too. It makes me feel like I'm doing something with my life even though I'm slouching back and passively consuming someone else's hard work.

    • @judetheman1562
      @judetheman1562 2 роки тому

      @@MikhailFederov That’s called passive learning

  • @lifeiselsewhere1
    @lifeiselsewhere1 Рік тому +2

    The best scientific communication video I've ever watched!

  • @trueintellect
    @trueintellect Місяць тому +1

    Best explanation of the Riemann Hypothesis explanation I have ever seen! I wish this video existed when I was in college.

  • @Ennocb
    @Ennocb 3 роки тому +124

    Imagine some dude just single-handedly solving this in this UA-cam comment section like it was nothing.

    • @aidancanoli
      @aidancanoli 3 роки тому +35

      true and imagine it gets 0 like and is hidden away forever lmaoo :(

    • @goognamgoognw6637
      @goognamgoognw6637 3 роки тому +5

      @@aidancanoli welcome to my world.

    • @brendandaly5397
      @brendandaly5397 3 роки тому +9

      Will hunting has ENTERED the chat

    • @Edeinawc
      @Edeinawc 3 роки тому +1

      If some random person solves the problem in the comment section they're most likely full of shit and believe in the levitational properties of mercury.

    • @Ennocb
      @Ennocb 3 роки тому +17

      @@Edeinawc Someone with a real solution would indeed probably prefer another outlet to publish their findings, but I find it amusing to consider the notion of that outlet being this comment section despite better alternatives.

  • @newtonsheikh
    @newtonsheikh 3 роки тому +771

    Imagine if Reimann had a computer back then

    • @grzegorzowczarek3016
      @grzegorzowczarek3016 3 роки тому +432

      He would lost himself in cat videos and distracted done nothing.

    • @RoshanSharma-mo6vy
      @RoshanSharma-mo6vy 3 роки тому +79

      He would've been on a social networking platform like insta. The man was depressed af man his life was pretty sad. I came to know about him by a book called hyperspace.

    • @99bits46
      @99bits46 3 роки тому +50

      Probably make a good fortnite player. Remember Reimann wasn't above average mathematician before college and he wanted to pursue Chemistry.

    • @maxwellsequation4887
      @maxwellsequation4887 3 роки тому +13

      Could be a big thug life moment for mathematics
      Or...
      A big bruh moment....

    • @bulwinkle
      @bulwinkle 3 роки тому +7

      He did have a computer but it was a wetware model.

  • @rauld3560
    @rauld3560 Рік тому

    U guys show video making the same love as you do to math! Thank you! Great video and great explanations

  • @GeorgeZoto
    @GeorgeZoto 8 місяців тому

    Beautifully made and explained topic, thank you for sharing it with us. What an interesting hypothesis 🤔

  • @tanavat555
    @tanavat555 3 роки тому +152

    I don't usually comment but holy crap, the quality of this video is insane.
    it's nice to see more easy to understand science/math content popping up. thanks for the hard work.

  • @thedoanzone
    @thedoanzone 3 роки тому +226

    I completely followed this for the first 38 seconds.

    • @jondunmore4268
      @jondunmore4268 3 роки тому +6

      You got that far, eh?

    • @klam77
      @klam77 3 роки тому +3

      HA! 39!!!! Whooped your backside!!!! I'm the greatest.......

    • @juggerswood
      @juggerswood 3 роки тому +2

      Weakling, I got 42 seconds in.

    • @shanmukeshr1696
      @shanmukeshr1696 3 роки тому +1

      I completed the whole video but it's mostly wierd and I have a lot to learn I'm in my 12th grade now

    • @shanmukeshr1696
      @shanmukeshr1696 3 роки тому +1

      @@klam77 😂😂😂

  • @chipsafan1
    @chipsafan1 Рік тому

    This is the best video I've watched in a long time. I made my way here from a video about Mertens Conjecture.

  • @laplacia
    @laplacia 2 роки тому +212

    This is the most concise and well-explained Riemann Hypothesis video ever.

    • @HitBoxMaster
      @HitBoxMaster Рік тому +1

      ANd I still couldn't understand much of anything at all.

    • @Silverhand290
      @Silverhand290 Рік тому

      @@HitBoxMaster Me neither, although I think I felt the breeze as it went over my head

    • @grenvthompson
      @grenvthompson Рік тому

      @@HitBoxMaster I have a math degree and don't understand this hypothesis. The video took a couple of leaps that lost me.

    • @raulgalets
      @raulgalets Рік тому

      agreed

  • @milkmayun
    @milkmayun 3 роки тому +175

    This is really good. But that moment at 7:13 where he makes the leap to prime numbers went by waaaay too quickly. I had to stop and rewind and pause to catch the transformation.

    • @AletheiaVV
      @AletheiaVV 3 роки тому +3

      Same

    • @TheMilan0
      @TheMilan0 3 роки тому +2

      Could have made it easier by writing as multiples of s. Like 0s 1s 2s etc.

    • @xiphosura413
      @xiphosura413 3 роки тому +4

      Yeah I had to watch that part a few times to get it, the rest of the video went fine!

    • @epajarjestys9981
      @epajarjestys9981 3 роки тому +11

      @@xiphosura413 The part at 13:14 where he talks about harmonics is where he presents that modified step function and mentions "harmonics" I'm not able to follow anymore. What is he talking about?

    • @ssarmazi
      @ssarmazi 3 роки тому

      Exactly where I got confused.

  • @enananbaabanabab
    @enananbaabanabab 4 місяці тому +2

    my knowledge on this factor has went from 0.1% to 5%, good job kind sir.

  • @UTKRISTHSIKSHABPSIR
    @UTKRISTHSIKSHABPSIR Рік тому

    Great respect to animation as well as speaker..so easily clear the most hardest concept ever..

  • @danreach
    @danreach 2 роки тому +98

    I studied this hypothesis as a senior math seminar project in undergrad. Very tight and clean synopsis. Wish this video existed back then.

  • @4grammaton
    @4grammaton 3 роки тому +355

    Can we also have a video about why it's so difficult to prove, or rather why it's been so difficult for mathematicians to find the proof thus far?

    • @2timotei
      @2timotei 3 роки тому +28

      now that you mention it. i also want one

    • @smartfish13
      @smartfish13 3 роки тому +106

      Unlike many tough math problems, the general consensus is that no one has a clue for how to solve this. Most of the progress that has been made has been to show that it is equivalent to other conjectures, but no one knows how to solve those either. The Wikipedia article has a decent list of some facts, which if proven, would imply the Riemann hypothesis.

    • @u.v.s.5583
      @u.v.s.5583 3 роки тому +3

      It is complicated. There even is this de Branges thing (if somebody who is not a total nutcase writes down a proof attempt and nobody feels like checking it as that would be too much work)

    • @y__h
      @y__h 3 роки тому +1

      RH feels like a Gödelian Sentence.

    • @u.v.s.5583
      @u.v.s.5583 3 роки тому +18

      @@y__h It can't be. Why? If you prove RH is undecidable, it follows that a counterexample cannot exist, which implies RH is true, which implies it cannot be undecidable.

  • @da33smith37
    @da33smith37 2 місяці тому

    Beautifully lucid presentation. Thank you!

  • @karolinagreen4216
    @karolinagreen4216 Рік тому

    these videos actually make me realise how fascinating maths is

  • @cauliemac9203
    @cauliemac9203 3 роки тому +691

    Proof by appeal to authority. If Riemann thought it was true, then it is true. Q.E.D

    • @morgiewthelord8648
      @morgiewthelord8648 3 роки тому +1

      @Keith Smeltz mst-edu haha nice

    • @xTheUnderscorex
      @xTheUnderscorex 3 роки тому +95

      Counterproof by appeal to authority. Riemann thought it needed a proof, so it needs a proof.

    • @willmungas8964
      @willmungas8964 3 роки тому +3

      @@xTheUnderscorex :(

    • @whatsthisidonteven
      @whatsthisidonteven 3 роки тому +20

      Proof by appeal to the stick. If you _don't_ want your sorry butt kicked, then Riemann's hypothesis is true. Q.E.D.

    • @xTheUnderscorex
      @xTheUnderscorex 3 роки тому +18

      @@whatsthisidonteven Proof by exultation of masochism, I do want my sorry butt kicked so Riemann's hypothesis remains unproven

  • @aquila7615
    @aquila7615 3 роки тому +445

    This guy explaining imaginary numbers made more sense than when I learned about them last year in class

    • @Guido_XL
      @Guido_XL 2 роки тому +15

      Complex numbers would make much more sense if you were shown it in its most useful applications, such as electric signals, or mechanical movement. In the Euler's formula, you can see as how a complex number can be understood as consisting of two components: one cosine function to depict the horizontal component, and a sine function to depict the vertical component. Imagine a circular movement of a point in that plane. For each point, there is a cosine component, giving you the projection onto the horizontal, and a sine component, giving you the projection onto the vertical.
      It boils down to a simple triangular calculation. A point in a plane can be expressed by its Cartesian coordinates, or, by its Polar coordinates.
      Consider the imaginary i to map a 90 degree angle on the complex plane. Each time you apply one times i, you move by 90 degrees counter-clockwise. Travel twice 90 degrees (twice i), and you have traveled 180 degrees: you have reached -1. Continue so, and each time you jump one time i, you jump 90 degrees counter-clockwise.

    • @Guido_XL
      @Guido_XL 2 роки тому +6

      It's what we call "quadrature". It is applied in Fourier analysis and integration, and very practically in decoding movement and speed direction of electric motors. A motor-decoder detects the rotation of the motor's axis by using two detectors that are aligned in such as way as to register the axis movement with a 90 degree difference between both detectors. When the movement signal has stabilised the signal of one detector, the other detector is picking up the change of its signal and triggers the output to switch. The output is always well defined by this design, as both detectors never have an overlapping status of their signals. A quadrature design is very clever.
      It is also very useful in the synthesis of complicated signals by mixing a sine and a cosine function, rendering any intended electric signal (as applied in medical ultrasound devices).
      Fourier analysis, quadrature applications, they all revolve around that same concept of complex numbers. It's not just mathematical theory, it is very practical indeed.

    • @alkh3myst
      @alkh3myst 2 роки тому +1

      That's because there are literally a gazilion bad math teachers. This figure was determined using "alkh3myst's conjecture".

    • @ultraderek
      @ultraderek 2 роки тому +1

      @@Guido_XL they make more sense but are still a pain in the butt. It’s so easy to flip a sign.

    • @DrCorndog1
      @DrCorndog1 2 роки тому +3

      To be fair, though, it's much easier to understand the general problem as presented in a 16-minute video, where the rigorous proofs are omitted and the details smoothed over, than to understand the technical details or to work with the precision required by a semester-long course.

  • @jimmypk1353
    @jimmypk1353 Рік тому +1

    Great animation; even GREATER voice over. Prof. Alex Kontorovich has such a distinctive voice!

  • @ryanreynolds7310
    @ryanreynolds7310 10 місяців тому

    After having learned about harmonics and finding the fundamental frequency of functions using imaginary numbers from school, my mind has been blown wide open after seeing this video. I’m having a ‘full circle’ moment right now

  • @tmquangvn
    @tmquangvn 3 роки тому +49

    Put the 1M$ unsolved problem aside, this is so oddly satisfying to watch!

  • @TheLunkan22
    @TheLunkan22 3 роки тому +57

    At some point I didn't understand anything but I kept watching cause the animations are just so crisp

  • @beautiful.imagination
    @beautiful.imagination Рік тому

    Hi Quanta Magazine
    Thank you for the wondeful topics you teach us. 🌻
    I only understand half of the video could you please explain more about the second half .

  • @khalidsaad9452
    @khalidsaad9452 9 місяців тому

    Great video and explanation, it really cleared out why its so sought after.

  • @wenbornwilliam
    @wenbornwilliam 3 роки тому +83

    Love the way you illustrate your vids!

  • @PaulPaulPaulson
    @PaulPaulPaulson 3 роки тому +19

    If you want to get familiar with the Riemann zeta function, try to proove the following:
    If you only take every second summand of the zeta function (see 9:42) for a given value of s and draw the intermediate results for the first summands one at a time (similar to 10:03), you get a graph that converges to an outgoing 'spiral' that gets slower and slower, i.e. needs more steps to complete the next rotation than the previous one. You can draw one spiral for the summands with odd 'index' and one for those with even 'index'.
    Try to proof:
    1. The centers of the two spirals will be at different points unless the input (s) is one of the zeros of the original function.
    2. The centers never exactly meet for any other input.
    3. The centers only meet at the origin (0, 0).
    4. There is no input for which only one of the centers is the origin.
    You might need to find a useful definition/formula for the center first.
    You might need to exclude trivial cases for some of these.
    Visualizing this first by plotting the graphs and playing around with the parameter s might be useful.
    Try to plot both spirals in the same plot. Try flipping the signs to align them.
    You can assume the Riemann hypothesis to be true if you need it for a proof.
    Some easier tasks for warm up:
    a) Which formula describes the length of the nth summand of the zeta function? In other words: What is the distance in the complex plane between two consecutive intermediate results, i.e. between the results for the first n-1 summands and the first n summands?
    b) Which formula describes the angle of the line segment between those two points in the complex plane?
    c) Can you use this to formulate the zeta function with two dimensional vectors and without complex numbers?
    d) What if you only take the summands with odd/even index?

    • @commie281
      @commie281 3 роки тому +4

      Someone reply to this comment later to remind me to learn all these terms. It would probably take me about 30 minutes to even comprehend your comment.

    • @abhanand7470
      @abhanand7470 3 роки тому +1

      Learn all these terms

  • @capeandcode
    @capeandcode 9 місяців тому

    This is one of the most beautiful things I've ever seen!
    And I am someone who has been horrible at mathematics and failed a bunch of times! But Now I'm working from three years in Computer Science and starting to learn maths from scratch.
    It is surprising to me how awesome mathematics is if only I could find the right tools or people to learn from.

  • @pe1900
    @pe1900 3 роки тому +50

    the production quality on this is way too high for it to only have a million views. it explains the subject so well with such a unique art style in such a short amount of time. keep up the good work

  • @randallgingerich1969
    @randallgingerich1969 3 роки тому +258

    I literally had to google "what is a prime number?" I'm clearly in the wrong place.

    • @sarthakb8698
      @sarthakb8698 3 роки тому +18

      Trust me when I say you're not alone...

    • @yovtobe
      @yovtobe 3 роки тому +9

      Ooh this is so much fun. You're in for a good time

    • @lawless201
      @lawless201 3 роки тому +34

      I still have to use the "the alligator eats the bigger number" for greater and less then symbols.

    • @agape_99
      @agape_99 3 роки тому +4

      We are in the right place

    • @justanotherguy469
      @justanotherguy469 3 роки тому +2

      Why literally? And by the way, you can not "Google" anything as Google is a proper noun and not a verb.

  • @PaulCashman
    @PaulCashman Рік тому

    Excellent, informative video with truly knockout graphics.

  • @brendanwelch8726
    @brendanwelch8726 9 місяців тому

    great video. i can tell a lot of work was put into it. I saw someone on tik tok taking the first minute of your video and using it for views without giving you proper credit

  • @johngarnham861
    @johngarnham861 3 роки тому +52

    I might only understand 10% of this, but I'm still utterly fascinated.

  • @MrAllenmath
    @MrAllenmath Рік тому +7

    This is the best video explanation of the Riemann Hypothesis. Thank you for taking the time and effort to produce it.

  • @TheAtheist22
    @TheAtheist22 Рік тому

    What a beautiful presentation. Thank you. I've subscribed.

  • @ejharrop1416
    @ejharrop1416 Рік тому +1

    Fascinating and informative. If only we could pass the current state of knowledge back to the masters. What would they think or did they just know. 😮. Thank you

  • @cartifan399
    @cartifan399 3 роки тому +135

    This seems pretty easy to solve though, I'll give it a try tomorrow.

    • @dtp0119
      @dtp0119 3 роки тому

      You're joking right

    • @cartifan399
      @cartifan399 3 роки тому +56

      @@dtp0119 Obviously not.

    • @TheodoreServin
      @TheodoreServin 3 роки тому

      Let me know how it goes

    • @cartifan399
      @cartifan399 3 роки тому +70

      @@TheodoreServin As I expected it was pretty easy to solve. I won't release the answer though because that would take the fun away from the people still trying to figure this (rather easy) equation out.

    • @lostpony4885
      @lostpony4885 3 роки тому +8

      Right between breakfast and cold fusion.

  • @punditgi
    @punditgi 3 роки тому +58

    A masterpiece of mathematical explanation!

  • @michaelknowler3057
    @michaelknowler3057 Рік тому

    Thank you Alex: before this I didn’t really understand the Riemann Hypothesis. Fascinating video, many thanks.

  • @eliordadon2938
    @eliordadon2938 7 місяців тому

    it was fascinating listening to you professor ! you got a new sub

  • @adnanqamar7815
    @adnanqamar7815 3 роки тому +16

    Can't put it in words how beautifully my brain circuited near the end.

  • @mikes9645
    @mikes9645 3 роки тому +15

    Massive props to you for this video. Excellent voice work, animation and music. Re. the content - I learned enough to know that I'd never cut it as a mathematician. But this is about as approachable an explanation as I think anyone could ask for. Thanks for producing this.

  • @ikkeheltvanlig
    @ikkeheltvanlig Рік тому +1

    This is so mind blowing I'm scared of truly understanding it in fear of losing my mind

  • @ivancamacho7668
    @ivancamacho7668 Рік тому +1

    You just made a real Master Class of Math. Thanks! I enjoyed it as much as good music!

  • @mwtimmins
    @mwtimmins 2 роки тому +71

    "Don't need to be a maths professor to follow" - yeah but no, it helps

    • @altrag
      @altrag 2 роки тому +2

      Not really. A year or two of undergrad (enough to have a vague idea of complex numbers and limits) is sufficient for the content of this video.
      Of course there's a lot of content surrounding the Riemann hypothesis (and the zeta function more generally) that this video didn't cover, and much of that absolutely requires a post-doc level grasp of math to fully understand.. but the video only touched on the surface level stuff and that's not nearly as difficult to grasp.

    • @waynemartins9166
      @waynemartins9166 2 роки тому +5

      forget about professorship, all you need is to tame the zeta function and play with it, interrogate it or even torture it sometimes, it will spit facts

  • @matbroomfield
    @matbroomfield 3 роки тому +177

    "No you don't need an advanced degree in mathematics to go on this journey with me." I was lied to!!!

    • @princeofcupspoc9073
      @princeofcupspoc9073 3 роки тому +10

      He never strayed beyond high school math. The problem in the US, is that most schools do not teach their students high school math. They are too busy prepping everyone for the exact questions on the standardized tests.

    • @matbroomfield
      @matbroomfield 3 роки тому +31

      @@princeofcupspoc9073 Thank you for the passive aggressive insult, but I'm from Britain.

    • @Upstreamprovider
      @Upstreamprovider 3 роки тому +9

      @@matbroomfield Probably holds true here as well, mate.

    • @matbroomfield
      @matbroomfield 3 роки тому +3

      @@Upstreamprovider :-) thanks

    • @CaptTerrific
      @CaptTerrific 3 роки тому +4

      @@princeofcupspoc9073 ...what high school did you go to, where they taught complex analysis or wave functions!?!? I'll admit, I'm from the USA, but we only went through infinite series in my high school

  • @aroundandround
    @aroundandround 9 місяців тому +2

    Very nice video. Despite being fairly mathematical, I happened to never technically encounter the Reimann hypothesis or taken the time to really understand it until I watched this video.

  • @punk3900
    @punk3900 7 місяців тому

    Thank you for this excellent explanation of how much I don't understand the Riemann hypothesis!

  • @IanGrams
    @IanGrams 3 роки тому +10

    I've known of the Riemann Hypothesis for a bit now, but never bothered to try and understand it because I thought it was beyond my comprehension. But wow this video did a great job at explaining what it says, what lead up to it, and what is significant about it. Thank you to all who made this for expanding my understanding!

  • @Engineeringuncovered
    @Engineeringuncovered Рік тому +1

    What a beautiful explanation of such an advanced topic. I’m an engineer so I have some understanding of higher level math concept, but I showed my girlfriend (a graphic designer) and she understood it too. Thank you

  • @advaitanand1864
    @advaitanand1864 3 роки тому +8

    This channel should reach 1 million.👍🏼
    What a content,nicely explained.