I love watching people talk about topics they are passionate about, like Sarah here. So much to admire about their curiosity and enthusiasm

She appears incredibly excited when discussing mathematics.

@chullupa

4 ай бұрын

I can change that

@curtiswfranks

4 ай бұрын

As we all should be.

@xanderalaniz2298

4 ай бұрын

The difference between a job and a vocation.

Something deep in the structure of the cosmos scales to the human experience. It’s fascinating.

"Mathematics is the language of nature. Everything around us can be understood and represented through numbers." - Max Cohen

4:44 Damn, she nailed it. Too bad that most people don't see it.

I love this so much. Thank you for tying the arts and the sciences together in a beautiful and accurate way. 🙏👏keep up the great work, I hope this inspires many people

Patterns, Fibonacci number and fractal geometry.

I love her passion and the artful way in which she presents the beauty of mathematics ~ Elegant equation

She clearly enjoys mathamatics and music and talks about it so passionately. Great video

Deeply Interesting, thought of this prior and it's great to see a video on this topic thus clearing my concepts!

Elegantly explained. More like this and more of her, please.

This is super cool. It's fun hearing from people who see things in the world that most people overlook.

Thank you for this wonderful video of Prof Hart. Is there a longer version of this interview? I loved her recent book Once upon a prime which touches upon the fascinating connection between literature and mathematics. A big fan 😊

I think I need to find out more about those 17 patterns!

Super Cool! This again remind me if I able to find new patterns what I am not looking for.

Brilliant episode!

This is so cool!!

We just proved the classification of wallpaper groups in my algebra class. It’s a pretty brutal proof.

As much as I love Quantas videos, this one is too much on the surface for me. It transports excitation for mathematics, yes, but that’s about it. As sympatic as the protagonist is and as (as usual) high the quality of the video is, it did not satisfy me. I am curious for the next videos.

@isobaric

4 ай бұрын

Feel the same way

@matthiasguenther6576

4 ай бұрын

Same

I’d love to see a follow up video talking about symmetries found in common household objects or rooms! So fascinating

This is great

Mathematics IS incredibly exciting!!!!!

800th like :) Ramanujan could find a relationship between unrelated fields :)

Why 17 wallpapers? What are those patterns?

Wow

This video just literally described why I love math it’s everywhere. I like to say that math is the language in which God used to create the universe

Everything is mathematics

Respect

Fractals, because of their symmetry tend to be quite appealing to our senses.

@frun

4 ай бұрын

Universe is a fractal 🖼️. Physicists get truncated fractal by limiting the energy scale of quantum fields. But being the fractal 🖼️, universe has an infinite ♾️ energy.

One time I noticed a pattern but people told me not to notice...

Prfound - Thanks

Everything is art

I took lsd and realized this. Didn’t really occur to me before that everything is math.

Add Gödel and you get a book title

Is mathematics invention or discovery? Though the professional mathematician may notice acts of discovery in their work, I think ultimately it has to be categorized as invention. We have scientific standards for discovery, and mathematics on its own doesn't meet them. Mathematics even contains tools which assume undiscoverability when applied to nature, such as probability theory and statistics. In our interactions with the universe, I'd even argue it's the simplifications afforded by assuming undiscoverability which give rise to mathematical thinking in the first place! In this view, the primary function of logic is probabilistic, rather than deterministic. I think the foundations of set theory may be misleading people into applying mathematics to scientific problems in an incorrect manner. In the sciences you can afford yourself enough paradoxical thinking to assume a solution to Russell's paradox, and bifurcate the universe (or multiverse) into hypothetical states, such that a probabilistic, top down analysis can be developed. It doesn't always work that way, but the sciences do allow for this kind of trial and error development, containing contradictions and paradoxes and loose ends. Science must even allow for the use of entirely alien mathematics which makes for better predictions. Something that's worth thinking about in our approach to AGI. (I think invention is the preferable result. It's more creative! The discovery counter position is a very convenient shield against argument, but limits interpretation.) I think it's better when thinking scientifically to consider mathematics a language, which contains instructions to be imitated, and which can be interpreted and reinterpreted within different analytical frameworks. It's instrumentally critical in the sciences to be able to replicate instructions with very high precision, just as it's critical to replicate experiments with precision. Coherence is a secondary concern, in practice.

observer bias. inverse square law. mathematics is how we interpret reality. it's not reality that's made of mathematics. we have no proof our experience of the universe is the only type of experience of the universe and we could very well be biased about symmetry because we experience some dimensions as symmetric. We are unable to observe some dimensions, and we are forced to observe some. But who's to say it works the same for everything? Fungi? Plants? Light? Entropy? The problem with Einstein's theory of general relativity is that it doesn't realize relativity is entity based not frame of reference based (observer bias). Projection of reality, the law of attraction, quantum entanglement & wave function collapse, Buddhist cosmology and Taoist philosophy had plenty of it figured out without math... BTW cognition also works with neural supersymmetries on multiple axis of awareness. Which is why humans revere time like they do. But it's another bias, for another discussion....

@_harrysingh

4 ай бұрын

This is an unanswered question. If mathematics is real or just exists as an abstract concept in our brain. A lot of things have been figured out without mathematics but then out brain too sub-consciously 'calculates' our actions and hence can be said to depend on mathematics (or a vague form of mathematics)

Mathematics underlies the reality of the universe. It’s how everything relates to everything else, including quantum events. It describes beauty and truth.

@emil8782

4 ай бұрын

Doesn't math rather describe than actually "be"?

@metasamsara

4 ай бұрын

@@emil8782 YES math is a human construct of a tool used to make sense of reality. It IS NOT reality. There is always the possibility of observer bias. Interacting, even to observe, with a quantum state of entanglement causes its wave function to collapse into a state. This is the part Shrodinger couldn't finish proving because he trusted Einstein's theory of general relativity which turned out to be blinded by observer bias of a supposed "general frame of reference" which isn't how relativity truly works. This is also, as a side note, why NASA predicted wrong the impact of their rocket on the asteroid they hit recently, and it's also why the maximum speed of light is another bias that fails to account for extra dimensions and the fact time isn't real but a local phenomenon caused by entropic shift/pull (like gravity, and both could be exo-dimensional funnels), and planets orbit casting shadows has nothing to do with actual time as in chemical transformation of reality. Past and future are an illusion of the mind, of the self stuck for the ride. Light on the contrary has been known to demonstrate behaviors of going back through time while accounting for relativity such as with multiple light sources and destinations observed in the double slit experiment.

Pattern. Pattern. Pattern. Pageau Jonathan

well you are talking about determination theory, or are we in a simulation? or maybe we can't understand god. I struggle with this

17 as one number. Is also a pair. As a pair it is expressing the reality of a set, as set forth in sacred scripture. The BE-ginning story was 6 and 1, 7 in total. There is unbelievable information re-vealed through the 6 Then there is the "rest" Only with the rest was material perfection complete. Yet complete beyond material definition., As stated in scripture, this completeness is two more. The single number signifying completeness be-ing 9 The pair 1 and 9 as expressed in 19 a point, through the pairing of number revealing the first trinity of one, expressing complete unity. An interaction of two and three that we have observed in our material investigations. Yet the foundation for understanding is from the first reflected pair1-1 the first pair expressing variation being 1-11 1-2 In this day and with the di-mensional reality realized through di-scovery of human material investigations a new be-ginning in human advancement. A new storyboard, void "indefinably limitless" of which we can, and as aided by the seen connectedness of all we currently understand start again from the first re-cognized constants 1 2 1/2 to discover the "rest" all that our material perceptions missed.

👍

I love you all.

We can defeat President Valentine with this knowledge

just, call the unknown maths be x...and starts to live instead of just naming things.

Sacred Geometry? This video is awesome

All fascination disappears, when the mathematicians arrive. They lack imagination, they only think in formulas. but it is like the note on written on the paper, if you read it, you don't feel the spirit when listening to that part.

maybe math as we understand it is wrong, maybe the model and your ability to look at things are flawed =

Read. I Saw No Way. The Heavens Were Stitched. By, Emily Dickinson. She loved math.

everything is mathematics... if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail 😂 I love math, though ❤

you could make a religion out of -no don't

Notation is quite rigid.

Quanta Magazine create video daily but you are stay 7 more day why and how PAZA M C69AoneA