It's amazing how after Brady did so many of these videos, for so many years, he has developed a mathematician's mind, and is asking EXACTLY the questions a mathematician would ask.

@akhileshmittal3396

4 жыл бұрын

cause he is one

@pedroaugusto656

3 жыл бұрын

Does not he have a PHD in math ?

@fernandomargueirat6454

3 жыл бұрын

I kind of agree, but I'm pretty sure there are discussions about the topics before they record the interviews and these things are probably already discussed. It doesn't take away any value, he still has to be able to understand the concepts and throw the question at the right time, which is a skill that is much harder than what people expect.

@RodelIturalde

3 жыл бұрын

@@pedroaugusto656 he is a journalist.

@huh968

3 жыл бұрын

i mean that's pretty much expected tho lol, one would assume he learned quite a bit over those years

Brady is a crazy good math interviewer wth...

@Bronzescorpion

4 жыл бұрын

Agreed, he asks great questions. Either to clear something up, that was so obvious to the mathematician, that they briefly forgot to explain it or to give them a new point to explain from and thus progress the interview. I really think much of the joy these videos give, are in fact due to Brady's skill as an interviewer.

@CalvinHikes

4 жыл бұрын

He's clearly a smart guy.

@mfc4655

4 жыл бұрын

he educates himself on the topic so he can ask in depth question

@davidgillies620

4 жыл бұрын

I'm often struck by how quickly he homes in on a subtlety or a generalisation of a problem. Obviously a very highly intelligent individual. I think that must be very rewarding for the people he's interviewing (there really isn't much that scientists/mathematicians/engineers like more than explaining something cool to an intelligent layman)..

@rayu__641

4 жыл бұрын

i agree!!!!

Between Holly and James Grime it's hard to choose who has more infectious enthusiasm for math!

@jacobshirley3457

4 жыл бұрын

What about that klein bottle guy?

@AdStellae-

4 жыл бұрын

@@jacobshirley3457 Cliff is great!

@NuisanceMan

2 жыл бұрын

@@jacobshirley3457 You mean the guy that's in one?

@HilbertXVI

2 жыл бұрын

@@jacobshirley3457 I think cliff is just on another level

@bane2201

10 ай бұрын

@@HilbertXVI Yeah Cliff wins hands-down. Whenever I watch him, I feel like his enthusiasm about math is so visceral (like his dancing) that it's _only_ restrained by the limits of the human body. If he was able to _fully_ unleash his true power in some explosive burst, his house would be a crater, and his city probably would be too.

I never knew I could be excited about fractions but here we are. Great job Holly, your enthusiasm is infectious.

What fascinates me in the example that she gave with three numbers in a loop is, the specific rationals can be related to music in just intonation tuning. The 5:4 ratio is a major third, and the 7:4 ratio is a harmonic seventh (there is meaning behind those musical terms, but there's also a lot of historical baggage, so don't worry about the details). If you combine those two with a root note (1:1 ratio) and a perfect fifth (3:2 ratio), you get a harmonic seventh chord, that occurs frequently in for example barbershop quartet singing. The perfect fifth can often be left out (because our ears/our culture often hears them as implied) but the root needs to be included. Now the third rational in the three number loop can be related to the ratio 1:4, which in musical terms is two octaves below the root. But due to octave equivalence is in the same pitch class as the root, and can be used as such. tl;dr: the three rationals in the loop she showed, when interpreted in musical terms, form a neat harmonic seventh chord.

@doublespoonco

4 жыл бұрын

This is intriguing

@harrympharrison

4 жыл бұрын

I would love a Numberphile video explaining some aspects of just intonation.

@jonnyphenomenon

4 жыл бұрын

Math in music is fascinating! So, is that just a coincidence? Or could it reveal other patterns in this equation exactly?

@Tapecutter59

4 жыл бұрын

Interesting observation.

@doublespoonco

4 жыл бұрын

@@harrympharrison maths in music is always really interesing

She's one of the better interviewees on this channel, and as an interviewer, Brady is good at asking insightful, relevant questions.

@hi_pd

3 жыл бұрын

What about Dr Hannah Fry?

What a way to end the week, she's one of my favorites on this channel!

@R_V_

4 жыл бұрын

Holly Krieger > Hannah Fry.

@BubbaJ18

4 жыл бұрын

@@R_V_ why not both?

@Ken.-

4 жыл бұрын

Today's Sunday.

@sharpnova2

4 жыл бұрын

Are you capable of being honest about why?

@antilogis6204

4 жыл бұрын

@@sharpnova2 Extend that question to the 500+ likers.

maths does that so often 1? easy! 2? still easy! 3? soo many but not as obvious 4? haha no

@riccardoorlando2262

4 жыл бұрын

Along with the other thing math does: "We found this cool, easy, simple process and we want to run it backwards. Lemme get back to you with 100 years of research, 27 books and 492 papers"

@Patalenski

4 жыл бұрын

No, no, they said: 1 is easy, 2 is natural, 3 is complicated and 4+ is impossible! My wife's on the same opinion... :-D

@danielmalo1753

4 жыл бұрын

TREE(n) 1? simple 2? of course 3? no way jose

@someoneonyoutube8622

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah no it checks out I even tried using imaginary numbers too and it seems to cycle in 3’s or 2’s or 1’s but never 4’s or anything more’s

@Jacob-ye7gu

4 жыл бұрын

No matter how many iterations you're looking for, it's just finding solutions to a polynomial

I can't believe Holly will be my Complex Analysis lecturer next term in my second year of undergraduate maths degree!

1:52 - Matt Parker: “Finally, a worthy opponent! Our battle will be legendary!“

@thejiminator8816

4 жыл бұрын

haha

@shambosaha9727

4 жыл бұрын

@@thejiminator8816 I know you

@djkm9558

4 жыл бұрын

😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣

@lazypops3117

4 жыл бұрын

explain this to me someone

@Codricmon

4 жыл бұрын

@@lazypops3117 It's a quote from _Kung Fu Panda._

I love the “whoosh” sound Holly makes at 6:23. I’m glad I am not the only one that does that when drawing long arrows 😅

Good questions by brady.

@JMTavares7

4 жыл бұрын

His questions have gotten better then they used to be. He's learned from previous guests of course, a lot of the sames themes repeat, such as proving that we can/can't as opposed to conjecturing and infinite # of ways to accomplish something, etc.

@omikronweapon

4 жыл бұрын

I've always been pleasantly surprised by Brady's active role in the video. He often asks the same questions I have. He doesn't just let things slide.

@nicolasjacquinot4202

4 жыл бұрын

No there's only 7.

@shrirammaiya9867

4 жыл бұрын

@Captain_Morgan they will be divisible by 7

@bipcuds

4 жыл бұрын

@Captain_Morgan Only 7 will be prime, because 77....777 = 7 * 11....111

I'm 36 and I feel like a 7th grader crushing on his math teacher ever time I watch Holly.

@evanw7878

4 жыл бұрын

Creep

@mannyheffley9551

4 жыл бұрын

You are a deviant

@iamtheiconoclast3

4 жыл бұрын

Well that got out of hand quickly. Some people are really offended at some fairly ordinary things. :|

@Palimbacchius

4 жыл бұрын

@@iamtheiconoclast3 or pretend to be ...

@fattestallenalive7148

4 жыл бұрын

7:58

I surely want to leave a comment that your family would be happy to read. Great content and thank you.

@jgcornell

3 жыл бұрын

I understood that reference :)

@Apocalymon

2 жыл бұрын

@@jgcornell what's the reference!

Brings me to think about modulo arithmetic, fractions behavior in this context, and use of fraction to leaves placement by plants which is also kind of modulo to go from height to the next while growing. We obviously find a return to the starting point (orientation wise) at some time in life development of some plants. I love this.

I love the 'easy to understand' math problems that ends up with complicated solutions that I will never understand. Makes math so much more interesting.

@FFXIDragonli

4 жыл бұрын

Non Non 1-(-1)= 2, 1+(-1)=0, (-1)-1=-2, and (-1)+1=0.

@ScottStratton

4 жыл бұрын

Non Non Non Non um ... no. That is some personally-invented symbol manipulation by you. Is math the ultimate, super-truth of the universe? Probably not - seems unlikely to me. But regardless, when one applies a cognitive system to the world, it has to make sense at least internally ... and what you are saying is just arbitrary and nonsensical.

Imagine how much of an unknown genius the guy sorting the paper at the recycling plant is.

This looks a lot like the equation for the Mandlebrot set, but sticking to the real number line so you don't get pretty pictures.

@MagruderSpoots

4 жыл бұрын

With the right numbers you get the logistic equation which is the mandelbrot set on the real number line.

@simoncopar2512

4 жыл бұрын

It is, and the periodic sequences are related to the centers of out-growing bulbs on the real axis of the Mandelbrot set. Numberphile is slipping, normally, they would mention such interesting connections.

@Bollibompa

4 жыл бұрын

@@simoncopar2512 Yeah, for sure. One small example means Numberphile is slipping.

@Gruuvin1

4 жыл бұрын

And, what does Holly know about the Mandelbrot set? Right?

@Narokkurai

4 жыл бұрын

As I understand it, it IS the Mandelbrot set. C and Z are are the axes of the plane, and the beautiful colors of the Mandelbrot Set correspond to whether any combination of [Z,C] is periodic, and if so how many iterations it takes to converge. This theorem seems to be saying that for any non-integer rational Z, there is some value C which becomes periodic in three or fewer steps, but we cannot say for sure if there are combinations which will converge in 5 or more.

this video is perfect timing....this is my lesson for my students after Christmas break...im going to tell them all to watch this to get them ready...Thank you for the video !!

@mohammadfahrurrozy8082

4 жыл бұрын

You wouldn't steal a comment

@shubhodeepde3927

4 жыл бұрын

Well that's a bad idea

Really close to 3.14M Subscribers. I’m expecting a special episode.

@Brooke-rw8rc

4 жыл бұрын

lmk when it gets to 6.28. Then they can celebrate with whole pies instead of half-pies.

@jeromeorji1057

4 жыл бұрын

@@Brooke-rw8rc The Tau-ist vs the Pi-ous debate, circa 2019. Colorized

For 2- and 3-cycles, the solution is 'easy' because you just need to solve a quadratic and a quartic polynomial equation respectively. But for 4-cycles you need to solve an octic (eighth-degree) equation, and higher degrees for larger cycles. It is a well-known result that you cannot solve a degree-five or higher polynomial equation in radicals. So it is not a surprise that no one knows how to find 'nice' larger cycles (but of course purely numerical solutions can be easily computed).

@riccardoorlando2262

4 жыл бұрын

Hold on. A 1-cycle requires a degree 2 polynomial solution. A 2-cycle, degree 4; a 3-cycle already requires a degree 8 polynomial solution...

@alephnull4044

4 жыл бұрын

Riccardo Orlando Yeah sorry you’re right. Kinda surprising that they’ve got examples of 3-cycles then. But point still stands about higher cycles.

@patrickhodson8715

4 жыл бұрын

Aleph Null maybe it was just a guess-and-check situation. -7/4 isn’t that weird of a reaction if you’re just trying stuff to see what works

@patrickt.4121

4 жыл бұрын

What about irrationals? (Not mentioned in video and so not directly related to your comment) We know how to solve those polynomials, no need for radicals ...

@redpepper74

Жыл бұрын

I’ve heard that you can’t express all degree 5 polynomial solutions with radicals, so I wonder what other ways you could express them. Is there another kind of operation/ system/object that mathematicians use there?

I love that she laughs so much. It's fun to hear Dr. Krieger giggle with delight as reveals a surprising truth about fractions that on the surface seems quite mundane. It must be so much fun to be in one of her classes.

I want some math with James Grime. He is one of the first guys who boosted this channel. I really miss him. I have not seen him in this channel for a long time. Also it would be great if you got some initial members in this channel, like Hannah Fry or Simon Pampena.

@echo5delta286

4 жыл бұрын

He joined Matt Parker for a video on his channel, Standupmaths, 7 months ago. That was a fun one called Difference of Two Squares.

@ChrisLuigiTails

4 жыл бұрын

Shouldn't forget about Matt! Him and Cliff Stoll are my favourites!

@L0j1k

4 жыл бұрын

MORE SIMON!

@Crissix100

4 жыл бұрын

@@ChrisLuigiTails Oh I love Cliff, his enthusiasm is just amazing!

@brianpoi5117

4 жыл бұрын

@@frankwc0o We need a Statisticsphile to go along with Numberphile and Computerphile.

Classic Numberphile video. What a treat!

“Zed squared” When an American professor has gone over to the dark side.

@jshariff786

4 жыл бұрын

Ah, the dark side of pronouncing it the way that the people who invented the language (and the vast majority of those who speak it) do. Cheers from Canada.

@mattbarnes3467

4 жыл бұрын

@@jshariff786 but we kicked their asses twice and bailed them out twice. And as we all know, to the victor.goes the spoils. Z it is.

@jshariff786

4 жыл бұрын

Within your borders, sure. Everywhere else it is Zed. So really, majority rules (based on what the entire English-speaking world is doing). Also, you didn't write "Zee it is", you just wrote "Z it is".

@shyambuddh5546

4 жыл бұрын

Can't believe you all are literally having an argument about America Vs England based on how to pronounce the letter "Z" in the comment section of a math video.

@justincronkright5025

4 жыл бұрын

@@mattbarnes3467 Go watch, This Hour Has 22 Minutes - Apology to Americans. 'I mean when you're going up against a crazed dictator, you want to have your friends by your side. I realise it took more than two years before you guys pitched in against Hitler. But that was different, everyone knew he had weapons'!

2:05 'horseshoe mathematics'

@alexandersweeney6182

4 жыл бұрын

Gordon Chan I love this reference

@kyrlics6515

4 жыл бұрын

@@alexandersweeney6182 ??

I remember stumbling on this EXACT problem about a year ago and trying over and over to show that for a polynomial of degree d, there are no points of period larger than d+1 (any period less than or equal to d+1 can be solved directly by a system of d+1 equations with d+1 unknowns). Then hours later I googled to see that even in the quadratic case we're almost completely in the dark! What a wonderful problem in arithmetic dynamics.

Z=2 , c=-2 Z always equals 2 This is actually the start to a family of solutions where you just set c=-(Z^2-Z) For all positive integer values of Z. This seems like it has a close relationship with the first example Holly showed for the fractions where Z=1/2 and c=1/4 If c=-(Z^2-Z) then c=1/4 I think it applies to all values of 0

@ABaumstumpf

4 жыл бұрын

Was a really strange way they phrased it. It is still an infinite number of integer-combinations you can use - not very interesting but still they exist.

@evanbelcher

4 жыл бұрын

It doesn't just work for positive integers, it works for literally every value of Z because it's the definition of a 1-value cycle. Z' = Z^2 + C (original equation) Z' = Z (defines a 1-value cycle) Z = Z^2 + C (rephrased equation) C = Z - Z^2 (solve for C) which is just the simplified version of your formula.

@ABaumstumpf

4 жыл бұрын

@@evanbelcher "which is just the simplified version of your formula. " That one step of expanding the sign :P

@riccardoorlando2262

4 жыл бұрын

@Non Non I don't understand. Can you explain what you mean, or at least provide references where I may read?

@garret1930

3 жыл бұрын

@@ABaumstumpf lol yes I should've seen that.

this lady was a sub for a number theory class I took years ago.

@seededsoul

2 жыл бұрын

In what country?

@ninosawbrzostowiecki1892

2 жыл бұрын

@@seededsoul @ UIC (Chicago)

Is there a place to see the proofs showing it is impossible for 4 and 5?

Her videos are always very interesting! thank you!

My math teachers back from my gymnasium days would be so proud of me passionately watching numberphile! Also they would be very surprised...

Amy Adams teaches maths!

@Nihil975

4 жыл бұрын

That was my first thought too

@gabor6259

4 жыл бұрын

Ginny Weasley teaches maths!

@paulreader1777

4 жыл бұрын

@@sockington1 'maths' is the more common terminology amongst English speaking countries outside the north American continent.

@ScottKentEdu

3 жыл бұрын

Even the laugh.

Holly Krieger and Hannah Fry are my favorites. I love them.

@jacobschiller4486

3 жыл бұрын

Gee, I wonder why...

@steffen5121

3 жыл бұрын

@@jacobschiller4486 Me too. It's a mystery... 🤔

6:23 fascinating how that fraction made woosh sound travelling towards bottom left. Math is always fascinating.

@nicolageorgiev4350

4 жыл бұрын

Yes

OK, I’ve been a patron for a while but I have to double my contribution immediately. Holly Krieger is the reason. She has an incredible ability to make difficult topics understandable. Please, please have her on more frequently. Plus between the Mandelbrot set and this periodic fraction stuff her topics are so incredibly interesting. I see Holly Krieger, I press like, then I watch.

I’m glad she’s my inspiration to get through these finals right now

Dr. Holly = Autolike. My favorite equation.

This channel is about to hit 3.14 Million subscribers...Thats THE real milestone

I'm so glad channels like these exists.

"You're not going to do the next one?" "I think it's 677" BOOOOOOOOOOM!

I love the Holly videos. They are always interesting topics.

@vikraal6974

4 жыл бұрын

Na you love Holly

@none_of_your_business

2 жыл бұрын

@@vikraal6974 i am certainly guilty of this crime

@jacobschiller4486

2 жыл бұрын

😏

Dr. Krieger has a fantastic ability to explain things very well.

Beautiful! This video made my week by -7/4 times!

You can't just end there! You gotta give us the proofs!

@numberphile

4 жыл бұрын

No proofs but there is more detail in the second video on Numberphile2: kzread.info/dash/bejne/qGiAuaizhNzOoLg.html

@sasha6454

4 жыл бұрын

These proofs are left as exercises for the viewer.

@scowell

4 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately, there is not enough space in the margin... or this comment.

@randomdude9135

4 жыл бұрын

@Nighthawk814 wtf

@ccgarciab

4 жыл бұрын

@Nighthawk814 I'd imagine you ad a ^2 + c to the left side each time you try to prove a higher number of iterations?

4:47 She just hit the woah

@Diego-ji6nl

4 жыл бұрын

?

@blackcat5771

4 жыл бұрын

???

@CalvinHikes

4 жыл бұрын

Saw that.

@xybersurfer

4 жыл бұрын

oh. "Hit The Woah" seems to be a dance move. i was expecting something more interesting

@sfbs

4 жыл бұрын

1 to the Infinity lol with out even knowing

Thank you so much! Have a small request: can you please cover the Grassmannian? Thank you.

I have no idea what this was about but I watched the whole thing! Fantastic!

So weird to hear “zed” with an American accent.

@FBDSG

4 жыл бұрын

🇨🇦

@cleteblackwell1706

4 жыл бұрын

Dustin Boyd everyone I know says Zee FS

@jsloan16

4 жыл бұрын

Canadians say 'zed'.

@CowmanCowman

4 жыл бұрын

Massive respect for saying zed

@user-pn3fb9eo5i

4 жыл бұрын

Big up to all the Canadians in the house.

This math makes me feel uncomfortable but after its done i feel chill

Many catalysts in physics and chemistry are the loop kind where they change one or more times during their function, but the last step reverses this and puts them back where they started (carbon as the first step in a chain of elements inside of stars as an alternative method for changing hydrogen to helium, for example -- the "Solar Phoenix" process discovered by Hans Bethe). So this is not just an academic exercise.

What a great video. It taught me something fascinating about fractions I never knew. More please, and thanks Numberphile.

@KenanSeyidov

4 жыл бұрын

can you please tell me what it is you find fascinating?

Videos like this make me want to go back for my PhD in mathematics

I got drunk and iterated all over the place, and the next day I was back to myself☺

Thank you for the video! You friends are all super awesome!

Nothing more endearing than seeing someone nerd out over math. Love it.

Christmas came early for all of us :]

I like hitting the equal sign over and over on my calculator.

See extra footage and math detail from this interview with Dr Holly Krieger about The Uniform Boundedness Conjecture: kzread.info/dash/bejne/qGiAuaizhNzOoLg.html And Holly on our latest podcast episode: kzread.info/dash/bejne/g6Gas7OzmtPKoLA.html

To me, the most fascinating thing about fractions is that you can easily and rationally describe numbers with perfect precision when decimals fail. 2/3, for instance. There are still numbers, such as Pi, which both methods of expression fail. But there are many times which expressing a fraction is clearly better than a decimal. Even so, I often see people expressing a decimal when a fraction would do better.

It can be done with 4 using complex numbers. I've found a remarkable proof of this fact, but there is not enough space in the comment section to write it.

@stefanandries9455

4 жыл бұрын

Google docs + the link maybe?

@yashthakre8106

4 жыл бұрын

I would love to hear that

@tarkus44

4 жыл бұрын

hommage a Fermat?

@RalphDratman

4 жыл бұрын

It will be proved in about 400 years

@x714n0____

4 жыл бұрын

🤣🤣🤣

All of a sudden "fourths" started to be "quarters" for the rest of the video.

@rosiefay7283

4 жыл бұрын

No, quarters started out being quarters, then became "fourths". Fortunately, normality was restored later.

@idjles

4 жыл бұрын

And zeds

@VeritasEtAequitas

4 жыл бұрын

@@idjles Zombies should never have been involved.

@jshariff786

4 жыл бұрын

Umm yeah? There are frequently redundant, interchangeable ways of saying things. I'm sure you'll get over it eventually...

@greensteve9307

4 жыл бұрын

Who cares?

FINALLY!!!!! She’s back!!!! More please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is great! Thanks Holly.

Holly Krieger: Here's a 3-cycle of z=z²+c James Yorke: Period three implies chaos!

@Keldor314

4 жыл бұрын

Yup! A 3-cycle also implies all other length cycles exist, but it looks like you need to move past rational numbers to the set of real numbers for this to work. Finding their exact locations may be impossible, though, since it involves solving polynomials of order greater than 5.

@leapdrive

4 жыл бұрын

Pierre Abbat, did you mean: f(z)= z^2+c?

@Axacqk

4 жыл бұрын

@@Keldor314 You don't find the "exact locations" of irrational quadratic roots either. When we say "square root of c", what we really mean is "the number that is the unique positive root of x^2 - c"; the former is just a shorthand notation for the latter, and using shorthand notation does not increase the "exactness" of the value's description; it's still the _same_ description. There is another single parameter, polynomial-root-giving function, "the unique real root of x^5 + x + c", that can be used to write solutions to quintic polynomials in closed form. This function is called the Bring radical, and the shorthand notation is BR(c). It is as easy to compute with Newton's method as the square root.

@Keldor314

4 жыл бұрын

@@Axacqk Hrmm, true. Perhaps the algebraic numbers are too narrow to cover the concept of "exact locations". Or too broad. Although the order of the polynomials you have to solve increases exponentially with the length of the cycle since we're finding the solutions to f(f(f(...f(z))))=z. Assuming that there isn't some shortcut produced by by the fact that f(z)=z^2+c, we need to solve huge polynomials. 4-cycle gives a 16th order polynomial, 5-cycle gives a 32nd order polynomial, and so forth. Does a relatively simple root finding function exist for arbitrarily high order polynomials?

There is a point for me watching these kind of numberphile videos where I can't listen anymore, because the video made my math(s) mind going hyperactive and I understand a WHOLE lot more at once *math(s) giggles*

I wish I presented as well as Holly. Clear, concise, memorable.... and talented.

The maths are far above my head, and yet these presenters explain the complicated subjects with such joy. This channel has me digging out my old electronics books and equipment, re-learning the maths i'd let slip for many years, and applying them to building again. Thank you.

Holly is a great teacher!

The Amy Adams of maths 😁

I would be interested in hearing about the proofs, showing which iterations work and which don’t. For example showing why four iterations isn’t possible.

you can also get loops for any integer z’s if c = (z-z^2) ie: z=2,c=-2 (2^2-2=2) z=3,c=-6 (3^2-6=3) i guess this would work for any values of c and z that satisfy the equation, but i just noticed it first for integers

I am very appreciative of Numberphile videos, but something I keep asking myself is: why do they always write on paper instead of using a whiteboard? Isn't this just a waste of paper? This is a genuine question - if someone can answer this, I'd appreciate it! Thanks.

@skipfred

3 жыл бұрын

I don't know but I think it's just tradition. They're writing on what appears to be recycled paper anyway (from the color and texture). The amount of paper they're going through is nothing compared to even a small company.

@TheBaggyT

3 жыл бұрын

@@skipfred I get that. But comparing the amount of paper isn't really the point... the vast majority of similar videos use other technology (whiteboards, tablets, etc.) and have zero paper usage.

@MarcusCactus

2 жыл бұрын

My thesis director told me: "Never be afraid of wasting paper." One among the reasons being that chalk- or whiteboards are not permanent. Another being that you should not clutter your next equations in the blank spaces between previous ones. A third would be that limitations are bad for free science.

@TheBaggyT

2 жыл бұрын

@@MarcusCactus I get that when you're doing research, or working towards something big like a thesis. But if I'm making a video about something I already know about (which I assume these people are, that they haven't just thought of the idea on the spot), I would use a whiteboard because there's no need to keep a more permanent record. If you organise a whiteboard properly, there's no need to write new equations in the space between others. And how is a whiteboard a limitation?!?

I cant be the only person who sees Amy Adams

@petersellers9219

3 жыл бұрын

I'm still trying to calculate the number of freckles. A teaser!

Krieger is awesome! So much joy for math.

What a great way to start the day!

There were no people as interesting as this when I did maths at uni

@metalhos

4 жыл бұрын

you mean, no grrls?

@okie9025

4 жыл бұрын

@@metalhos :DDDDDDDD

@finlayhutchinson7370

4 жыл бұрын

Dad

@An.Individual

4 жыл бұрын

"interesting". I know what you mean, nudge nudge wink wink.

@TVIDS123

4 жыл бұрын

It's Only Me did you see the size of the iterations on that?!

I‘d really love to see a 3b1b-Video on this!

Just watched this twice first thing in the morning. Thanks for turning my brain on.

@xway2

4 жыл бұрын

@Max Chatterji America, probably? Certainly on a sunday anyways.

Hooray, Holly is back!!

11 minutes after posting is the longest I have ever taken to watch a Dr Krieger video.

Kinda reminds me the circle of fifths..... ;)

@Ryuuuuuk

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, my mind immediately made the same link, interesting.

[04:20] Is this brush font available for download somewhere?

Congrats on 3.14M subs.

Has chalkboard in background Uses paper towel from school bathroom

Zed zed top

@huawafabe

4 жыл бұрын

actually sounds more logical lol

It's interesting how the three numbers are equally spaced on the number line (-7/4, -1/4, and 5/4).

Very cool. One question, what are the implications of returning to the original number, does this have a real world application?

"ZED", you said zed. You've gone native.

@MrHarsh3600

4 жыл бұрын

That's how it's pronounced. Americans say it wrong.

@huawafabe

4 жыл бұрын

@@MrHarsh3600 As a german, i also love it. We don't really differentiate between 's' sounds and 'z' sounds, so it's incredibly hard to distinguish 'c' and 'z'.

@nassyl1

4 жыл бұрын

@Maximal's Personal Profile Pointing it out, however, makes you dull at parties.

@Petertronic

4 жыл бұрын

Holly talks about that in the podcast

@jb76489

4 жыл бұрын

LolGuy you don’t understand how dialects/language work

Numberphile comments were the last place I thought I'd see thirst comments

@jshariff786

4 жыл бұрын

Why?? There is significant overlap between the set of math nerds and the set of desperate men.

I will be sampling some of this for a future electronic music track -There is some gold in here :)

I Just love Dr Krieger

Z->Z^2 +C is really mysterious formula.

@vikraal6974

4 жыл бұрын

Laughs in Mandelbrot photo

This pretty much relates to Collatz Conjecture.

Really enjoyed this video

Lots of really good questions

Try C = -3 and start with 2 It creates a loop

@andrewcheng1948

4 жыл бұрын

2,1,-2,-3,6,33,906...

@thiantromp6607

4 жыл бұрын

Andrew Cheng 2, 1, -2, 1, -2, 1...

Amy Adams at it again!

That was really fun!

Programmer l'ensemble de Mandelbrot en Basic, que de souvenirs!! Et le calcul dans C avec la HP41-CV!!