The linear algebra lore is quite easier to understand than the gameplay

@MattHudsonAtx

Ай бұрын

I gave up on gameplay but I still follow all the best cheat tutorials

"Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself." I couldn't hold myself from this. LOL!

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Morpheus was a skilled mathematician.

@antoniusnies-komponistpian2172

Ай бұрын

An mxn-Matrix over a field K is a mapping from {1,...,m}x{1,...,n} to K. How about that?

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

@@antoniusnies-komponistpian2172 yep, you outsmarted Morpheus 👏🏻😎

Its awesome to hear how things were developed, that helps a lot in uderstanding certain topics

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Great! We are glad you liked it. Let us know any other subject (related to math and physics) that would be helpful to understand how it was developed 😎

The origin of the name "matrix" was actually given by Sylverter to refer to what a determinant takes. That is, a matrix was something that was the matrix of a determinant. The name determinant I thing is obvious

Highly informative ✨️ Q and A format is effective

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thanks man!!!

To the lady speaking, Hold on, and No: an ammonia molecule’s geometry has nothing to do with the concept of eigenstates. - despite the first treatment of it, theoretically. That’s why Feynman understood that shit well. There’s seriously a pressure in his global understanding of it to be having correct concepts. It’s initially distinctly incorrect. That’s acknowledged far after chapter 9 of the QM-red book. If you can’t see the need, Then this Linear Algebra is healthy for you. For it now lies in potential that you will grasp the distinction.

Awesome!👏 Luca, complimenti vivissimi ad entrambi! Due domande: 1) Non caricherai più video sul canale in lingua italiana? 2) Anche la tua compagna è matematica?

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Ciao! Vogliamo tantissimo farlo però abbiamo capito che cercare di fare video in tutti e due è troppo pesante… quindi la nuova strategia è concentrarci su questo qua e crescere questo canale visto che il pubblico è più vasto. Infatti, abbiamo monetizzato proprio oggi il canale! Haha quindi useremo questi soldi per pagare qualcuno per fare l’editing, così abbiamo più tempo per produrre più video. Non sappiamo esattamente quando, ma appena vediamo che il canale ha una dimensione abbastanza grande, cominceremo a caricare video in quello in italiano pure. Purtroppo, non si può avere tutto contemporaneamente 😣. Per quanto riguarda Sofia, lei è laureata in storia, ma comunque trova la matematica e la fisica molto interessanti 🙂‍↕️ ma lei è bravissima sopratutto facendo tutte le animazioni e lo script. Insomma, diciamo che io ho la conoscenza tecnica e lei la conoscenza artistica haha

Nice video, thanks. May I sugges that yo uenhance the sound quality of the speakers ? Better microphone, clip microphone and/or room with less echo ?

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Yes!!! You are right. We need to think about a way to eliminate the echo… the mic we bought is really good, but we still don’t know how to create the right environment in order to do that. Do you have any suggestions?

Your video quality is just awesome 👌

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thank you for the nice words! 😎

Good stuff man!

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thanks man 😎

it s been a while since i watched you videos but they are great as always

I think u should cover the calculus war which held betwn Leibniz and Newton for calculus for better understanding of its use..

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Yeah, I have a video about it, but it is not too deep on their conflict. Let me know if it is useful 😎

@ashutoshsahu654

Ай бұрын

Yes....my favorite teacher

@ashutoshsahu654

Ай бұрын

I want ur wp number to clear about my some doubt

Beautiful video as Always

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thank you Ali, and you giving us a nice comment, as always

Your vdo about Development of calculus was so much useful for me becoz as a mathemaric student we have been just given so much integration to do without knowing the real necessity of it. I really harashed becoz i don't know why i am doing this maths. But later i came across with ur vdo and my doubt were gone. Now i'm not a machine but machine who know the mechanism....

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Great comment. I think it is really easy to just calculate things without understanding the big picture. Keep it in mind

Excellent video

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thank you! What did you like about it? Did you learn something new? 😎

Keep going, man. This is beautiful🌹

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thanks Ahmed!! Let me know what you liked about it and what would want to see in the channel 😎

@AhmedYasser-33843

Ай бұрын

@@dibeos I hope you dive more into the concepts.

Good thumbnail and title!

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thank you, Toasty!!! 😎🤙🏻

Nice video, I studied linear algebra but it was mostly more mathematic than visual so I appreciate this more visual element of the video. ❤

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

That’s awesome! I’m happy it was helpful. Are there other subjects that you’d like to learn in a more “visual” way?

@rileythesword

Ай бұрын

@@dibeos I’m thinking topology maybe if that’s something you have experience with, mainly visualize mapping functions similar to the transformation in this video!

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

@@rileythesword oh yeah! My masters thesis was about an area of topology. I will add it to the list, thanks 😎

@rileythesword

Ай бұрын

@@dibeos okay then, awesome!👍🏻

Nice video

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thanks NaNaNa… I appreciate it 😎

4:42 , so what are they ?😅 can we imagine them ?

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Good question. Vector is a mathematical concept, and therefore it requires a mathematical (rigorous) definition. However, vectors are soooo useful in physics that physicists adopted them almost as if it were an inherently physical concept. In physics, as far as we know, there are only 4 dimensions, so it doesn’t make sense to treat vectors in physics using its most powerful and complete (but also more abstract) mathematical definition. Basically in physics it is enough to imagine a vector as an arrow. The correct rigorous definition would be: an element of a Vector Space. So then one asks: what is a Vector Space? It is a set of mathematical objects equipped with addition, and scalar multiplication, such that these operations satisfy: associativity of addition, commutativity of addition, etc… (it is easy to look up the entire definition). So basically, not only arrows satisfy these conditions. Some functions, “n-dimensional arrows”, polynomials, matrices, sequences, tensors, differential forms (etc) are all examples of vectors, by this rigorous mathematical definition. Is that clear? 😬

@hardwork3199

Ай бұрын

@@dibeos yes , thank u

This was fun

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thanks, Byron!! 😎🤙🏻

I heard you have a white Elantra for sale

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Really? Even I didn’t know that 😅😂

This channel is gonna be famous soon

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Thanks, really!! We just hope to grow as soon as possible and literally reinvest all the money it makes into the channel (and also expand in other languages in the future) so that we can produce more and better videos 😎

@xyz-bo1mr

Ай бұрын

@@dibeos you will

don't stop uploading

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

We won’t!!! 😎 but why do you say so? (Curiosity)

@hardwork3199

Ай бұрын

@@dibeos because humans love learning new things especially in domains we like , and seeing you guys not having enough support makes us afraid that you will stop :,(

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

@@hardwork3199 wow that’s an awesome comment. Thank you for the support 😁 we won’t stop at all, this is just the beginning 😎

And here I thought all you needed was lines and algebra. Silly me.

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

Hahaha yeah, linear algebra (and analytical geometry) can give this impression 😎📈

I think 99.999% of the time is about projection

@dibeos

Ай бұрын

It is indeed 😎

You want to pronounce it 'or-tho- NOR'-mal'. I know, Englsh is weird.

@dibeos

26 күн бұрын

Got it! Thanks, in the next videos I’ll say orthoNORmal 😉👌🏻

If you think the linear algebra in special relativity has anything to do with the concept of relativity (special or otherwise) You did well calling this linear algebra. And not anything else. Because that shit isn’t relativity, except when you understand the underground shit. Which I can already see you don’t. So you’re sitting and speaking in my territory, if you think you understand a thing about relativity with this shit. 🦝 Is it quantum mechanics? It’s not the world view; but it’s the vocabulary. (1) the worldview: an ontological status vibration of entities (Sydney Deng) is read from the collected data that is of a statistical nature (2) concept of a basis: is the only the part of the linear algebra that isn’t properly outside the essential quantum mechanics - and exists as ‘embedded’ in the quantum mechanical worldview in the modality of ‘example’ to supply the continuously-conceived-from-a priori worldview , the equating between ontological vibration and statistical data. Implying….. perhaps other means of embedding. The result of the logic in the practical sense which enjoys the illogical: ‘Rho is mod psi squared’ : a feature I don’t believe is a priori logical even with experiments to ‘suggest’ it: for this is where one reads mechanics from statistical data: psi from rho. 🦮now, I’m not saying that Fermi doesn’t know what he’s talking about. But this is the only thing that’s unacceptable. It’s pure theoretically understood as coming out of thin air - especially with a non-understanding of the abstract probability space. The de-broglie particle is sensible. And the schrodinger equation comes pure Logically from this. The problem is the untestability of worldview that has an open sense of mechanics. The difficulty therefore is having a singular concentration on the potential data that psi (not rho) implies. (Mod psi)^2 = rho, Therefore, is the only thing that’s truly (1) Einstein: incomplete as a worldview (2) Fermi: unacceptable as it exists in a working-theory (3) Schrödinger: made up, in reference to the cat’s eigenstates as a test to this theory’s rigor (4) Heisenberg: reason to interpret any such dispersive data as evidence of unknowability as a pure metaphysical deduction. (Unknowability a priori doesn’t necessarily follow from probabilistic knowledge) (6) Feynman: not something that will ever be nakedly seen in rigorous scrutiny for the empirical system he specialized in. - the ammonia maser. In particular, one is mostly studying an entity that can have two different energy states…. That’s about it! (7) Von Neumann: a reason to devote his life to building mathematical extraneaities…. Which could itself be understood as an experiment to see which mathematical entities will get ‘distilled’ as a study that is richly studyable for a diversity of personalities e.g. there’s many ways of conceiving of the iterated same-type event that will have been exacted and seriously believed in way….. i’m suggesting that there’s many ‘mechanics’ then, that a formalism would imply…. which is not necessarily a problem; however it demands the question of exactly what mechanics: The blinking in out of existence here means potentially too many things to be considered ‘understood’ in the sense of mechanics. The blinking in and out is first concieved of with the linear algebra (consider an orthonormal system that is algebraically 2 dimentional) The concept of even the existence of an alterior orthonormal system is now seen as Extremely powerful as in the case of modeling an ammonia maser. This is the beginning of conception of ‘quantum mechanics’: And the concept of de-broglie wave completes the gap between (1) the general varying between two (or infinity in the case of using a hilbert state space) states of being. and (2) the mechanics by which an entity would continuously transform into a nonpercievable field of probability density, which can be experientially percieved as distinct states of being. This linear algebra has nothing to do with the linear algebra one uses in the study of lorenz invariance, and the concept of relativity can be used pure theoretically to grasp the nature of mechanics implied by the de- broglie wave. In particular, what experimental reality would a quantum state appear as? e.g. The classical concept of force and how that exists here once again seems relatively independent of the canonical analysis, until one has collected all the point particles into one mathematical entity: The walls that an entity perceives as appearance around one at all times is primarily a potential well. As something that is not physical, and perhaps not intrinsically a feature of the concrete/paint/other materials that are classically responsible for exercising a fundamental potential energy that is found in the bulk psychological.

@hardwork3199

Ай бұрын

😮 😮 😮 😮 😮 😮 😮 ok i ll try reading the first lines , if im hooked i ll read it all

@hardwork3199

Ай бұрын

nvm , im still young for this ""shit"" as you said 😒