Пікірлер

• 
  @aalromihi7 күн бұрын

  Informative video, but I was distracted by the loud background music.

• 
  @tmjz732715 күн бұрын

  "How to prove anything" How do I prove consistency of ZFC?

• 
  @michealo6201Ай бұрын

  I have the prooof for the Riemann Hypothesis but there is not enoigh space in the comment to write it.

• 
  @mohammedmarhnine8194Ай бұрын

  Your students seems like a pawns, lol. Thanks a lot.

• 
  @filipus09819 күн бұрын

  bros a hater

• 
  @mohammedmarhnine819419 күн бұрын

  @@filipus098 what that mean!

• 
  @danielyounes7805Ай бұрын

  got a math olympiad tomorrow and somehow qualified without understanding proofs, but now i feel like im ready. thanks mate

• 
  @nickols6267Ай бұрын

  🙌 P r o m o s m

• 
  @Construction-agencyCoUkАй бұрын

  Great video. Starting my maths journey and this is very helpful

• 
  @0prcentАй бұрын

  all the best!

• 
  @butterspread4104Ай бұрын

  its pretty funny bc in france we do this in 9th grade

• 
  @virtualjack99272 ай бұрын

  another way of writing if and only if in a sentence instead of mathematical notation is iff. You can say A is true iff B is true

• 
  @TheGibberingGoblin2 ай бұрын

  megga bump

• 
  @sankasr2 ай бұрын

  Incredible man, keep it up.

• 
  @sonicwaveinfinitymiddwelle85552 ай бұрын

  there is some magical power in youtube algorithm which suggests me top tier quality mathematical video about topic which is relevant in school with no mistakes nor any delay

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  thank you so much!! (and thanks for the algorithm of course)

• 
  @mndtr02 ай бұрын

  What would be point of math if AI or some else technology will write proofs itself like an oracle or omniscient god? It's kinda math philosophy question because all history humanity lived in some math deficit of proved knowledge even if we had many proved things we always have something to proof

• 
  @cutepotato41902 ай бұрын

  how these visualizations are made? btw great video !

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  manim for everything 2d/math stuff, blender for general 3d animations and editing in davinci resolve thanks!

• 
  @cutepotato41902 ай бұрын

  @@0prcent impressive work :) waiting for more

• 
  @cutepotato41902 ай бұрын

  @@0prcent Thanks man

• 
  @thatparticularpencil50792 ай бұрын

  I would subscribe but you are at 3.14 k subs. Love this video btw; there are not enough videos about symbolic logic on KZread.

• 
  @lydianlights2 ай бұрын

  How to prove anything: step one: assume 1 = 2

• 
  @raykirystar2 ай бұрын

  Tha Baba is you ost is so good

• 
  @petermikus23632 ай бұрын

  Did you know that 1+1 = 1. ? In bools algebra that is.

• 
  @NibberPancake2 ай бұрын

  8:18 You didn't actually prove the statement is true for all n greater than or equal to 0, since when is between 2 and 4 we get false results. For example 2^2>2^2 is false; 2^3>3^2 is false; 2^4>4^2 is also false.

• 
  @gabrielvinagre25076 күн бұрын

  @NibberPancake || @0prcent The statement 2ⁿ > n² ⇒ n ≥ 0 means that if 2ⁿ > n² then n must be positive, not that if n is positive then 2ⁿ > n². A mistake was still made though. He said that 2ⁿ > n² ⇒ n ≥ 0 which is false. This is because 2ⁿ > n² is true at n ∈ (-0.76666469..., 2) ∪ (4,∞), this includes all negative numbers within (-0.76666469...,0). His mistake was assuming that n < 0 ⇒ n² > 1 instead of n < 0 ⇒ n² > 0. You can visually see this in Desmos by draphing n² and 2ⁿ and seing where the curve of 2ⁿ is above that of n², typing 2ⁿ > n² will show you directly.

• 
  @firevavanced66692 ай бұрын

  Can you teach us how to proof more advanced topics in mathematics too?

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  There are some things i didnt cover here but as a next step it would probably be best to take a look at some actual proofs (my recommendation would be proof-based book tackling a beginner area of mathematics, i started with analysis back then). I could do another video about advanced proof techniques/tricks but my next video will most likely be about something very different and after getting the basics of proofs down, usually the hardest part is just having an idea

• 
  @danielcingari54072 ай бұрын

  Please continue using cat memes and Minecraft in your editting; it succeeds in making the video (and therefore, its subject) more accessible, and they're adorable!

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  aw thank you! glad that helped with not making it seem too overwhelming

• 
  @mskiptr2 ай бұрын

  …and YT decided to shadowhammer my comment

• 
  @mskiptr2 ай бұрын

  (and it seems this one got too) edit: this one only partially

• 
  @notagain37322 ай бұрын

  If you are a nuroscientist watching tjis or someone you know please aske them this or let us know why we feel sleepy when watching scientific or mathematical explanations content or lectures , is it lack of sleep or how we think during the solution or paying attention or something else completly? im genuinly curious

• 
  @luffis19852 ай бұрын

  Your proof by contradiction (or as others have pointed out, proof by contrapositive) is actually not a complete proof. If (for simplicity) we call the statement "for all intergers n we have that 2^n > n^2" p, Then p -> n ≥ 0 isn't proven by n < 0 -> 2^n < n^2 You've not proven that n ≥ 0, you've proven that then n ≥ a and a ≥ 0. Let me clarify with an example of why your proof is incomplete: Let p be defined as before. Then we will prove the statement: p -> n ≥ -1 let's look at the case n < -1. It's clear that if n < -1 -> 2^n < 1 < n^2. Hence p -> n ≥ -1. QED The issue is that the opposite of "n ≥ 0" (i.e "not n ≥ 0") is not "n < 0" but "n ≥ not 0".

• 
  @Przygody_Klika2 ай бұрын

  Baba is you OST at the start of the video.

• 
  @joaovitorreisdasilva95732 ай бұрын

  Very interesting, ty a lot

• 
  @TheLuckySpades2 ай бұрын

  As others pointed out you showcase proof by contrapositive instead of by contradiction If you want to prove A=>B, this statement is equivalent to not B => not A The negation of A=>B is "A and not B", proof by contradiction takes those and leads it to a contradiction such as x=/=x, 1=0,... A lot of proofs for implications by contradiction can be easily turned into proofs by contrapositive since many do not use both A and not B in their deductions, only using not B and the contradiction being "since we assumed A and got not A we have a contradiction" This only really matters for philosophical reasons about validity of the law of the excluded middle and the fact that we are assuming math is consistent, but that is the kind of nitpicky math stuff I personally love

• 
  @TommyLikeTom2 ай бұрын

  first time I've heard _Baba is Me_ music in an unrelated youtube video

• 
  @jackiedim70282 ай бұрын

  Well if i learned anything it definitely proved that I'm a moron and a dumbass. Since i didn't understand a thing despite watching it 3 times

• 
  @avrelo_south2 ай бұрын

  I don’t have to do math

• 
  @mihailmilev99092 ай бұрын

  0:58 0:59 1something

• 
  @RaghavSharma-172 ай бұрын

  Baba is you

• 
  @_-___________2 ай бұрын

  Step 1: Accept reality as real... Or MAYBE Step 1: Assume that you can accept your own assumptions as acceptable. OR maybe Step 1: Accept that concepts exist~~~~~ UUh... Maybe... Step 1: Be alive. Step 2: Watch the video.

• 
  @mr.duckie._.2 ай бұрын

  i really like the Baba Is You music! i reccomend playing Hyperrogue next, it's an underrated game taking place in [content deleted] geometry

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  lol didnt expect a game recommendation in my comments but thanks! ill check it out

• 
  @FinBoyXD2 ай бұрын

  baba is you

• 
  @petrosthegoober2 ай бұрын

  baba is you music is a perfect match for this subject

• 
  @petrosthegoober2 ай бұрын

  now i am subscribed to lowestpercent *and* zeropercent

• 
  @AM-bw3ze2 ай бұрын

  Only because the statement does not work for some negative numbers, it doesn't immediately imply that it is wrong. I don't get why this "proof" should be enough. Btw. n^2>=1 is not true for all negative numbers.

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  remember, n is always an integer

• 
  @rauldurand2 ай бұрын

  so, at the end, do we have to choose a value for lambda at x0?

• 
  @petrus86752 ай бұрын

  I never even had this introductuin in my course. Even though this is my second year doing computer science this was very helpfull. Thank you!

• 
  @eNicMate2 ай бұрын

  2^3 = 8 < 9 = 3^2

• 
  @manawa38322 ай бұрын

  my biggest issue with proofs is no one bothers to spell out exactly what they are doing explicitly. too often relying on muh context and muh read my mind. i like programming because you have no choice but to spell out explicitly every minutia of your intended meaning. if only the math world could catch up but it is too bogged down by natural language explanations.

• 
  @manawa38322 ай бұрын

  i like what languages like coq and agda are going.

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  i know exactly what you mean, i also come from a programming background and the biggest thing im missing in maths is descriptive variable names. in lots of longer proofs its impossible to track all of the A,B,C,D,x,y,z and 10 different greek letters all being used in conjunction.

• 
  @danielbrovender29322 ай бұрын

  This would have been very helpful on my first year of uni

• 
  @x12_792 ай бұрын

  this is such a good video. If this is what proofs are like then I definitely need to take more proof based math as part of my computer science degree.

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  im not sure how accurate my portrayal of the proofs are but if youre intrigued i can definitely recommend it, especially with analysis topics the approach tends to give you a much deeper understanding for whats actually going on

• 
  @nenikam2 ай бұрын

  Well made video, here's an algorithm boost!

• 
  @Neptoid2 ай бұрын

  How to prove anything that can be proven (in mathematics)

• 
  @Fytrzaczek212 ай бұрын

  Very popular methods lecturers use are proof by it's obvious or proof by it's a task for the student to do in home

• 
  @apenaswellignton2 ай бұрын

  now i will be able to prove that i cannot prove this statement!

• 
  @vicferrmat44922 ай бұрын

  This is a very important video. I and many other people struggle with proofs. Thank you.

• 
  @Xmde2 ай бұрын

  I think that the Z symbol you used to denote the set of whole numbers is actually used to represent the set of integers. Integers include negative numbers where as whole numbers don't. I don't belive there is a good notation for the set of whole numbers.Generally I'll use N union {0}. Where N is the set of natural numbers.

• 
  @0prcent2 ай бұрын

  oh just looked it up and i didnt know that "whole numbers" was an ambiguous term. integers is of course what i meant but might be a bit of a translation mistake then, thx for making me aware of this