I actually have a proof for the Riemann Hypothesis, but it is too large to fit in the comment section.
@measthmatic_mathematics.
Жыл бұрын
😀🎉
@dragonuv620
Жыл бұрын
That's a great Fermat reference!
@crazychicken8290
Жыл бұрын
how is that a reference to him@@dragonuv620
@Soul-cu8zn
Жыл бұрын
Bro's trying to be fermat
@JackLWalsh
Жыл бұрын
Do tell.
@androane
9 ай бұрын
This was my explanation for every exam I failed. I just didn’t have the tools
@Sushant_saurabh
8 ай бұрын
Bro 😂😂
@pestifygaminghacks4713
8 ай бұрын
I mean its true
@zakariatalukdar2552
6 ай бұрын
And you are right
@ozjaszhorowitz919
6 ай бұрын
funny
@tristan583
5 ай бұрын
Lmaoo
@stefm.w.3640
3 ай бұрын
Us engineers do like to think of ourselves as smart, but tbh, good mathematicians are just on another level. It's awe-inspiring what they can come up with
@henrylee8510
Ай бұрын
Speak for yourself, I used cardboard and built a stand for my portable solar panel. Can a mathematician do that?
@whyitmatters6906
14 күн бұрын
I dont think is comparable, each one has it difficulties.
@NomadUrpagi
9 күн бұрын
Agree fully. I used to think computer science people are smart and then just realize that most of them are mathematicians that chose the easier path. I think the only people who can rival and outsmart mathematicians are physicists: because they have to do math as a prerequisite to find out their physics answers.
@emeth437
7 ай бұрын
They say they are not trying but secretely some are indeed trying.
@swissaroo
15 күн бұрын
Commonsense would have told you to split the solution into multiple comments! 😂
@KevinP-xs6qc
5 күн бұрын
@@swissaroo Commonsense would have told you to reply to the correct comment! 😂
@xyzct
11 ай бұрын
I suggest using a dream-catcher spliced to a vision board, coupled with quantum manifesting through mindfulness. If that doesn't work, try peppermint oil.
@evanblake5252
11 ай бұрын
Finally, some real mathematical insight.
@yousefabdelmonem3788
10 ай бұрын
Lost me at mindfulness
@Limabean1125
10 ай бұрын
Now we’re talking. Someone get on this right away!
@zwan1886
5 ай бұрын
I don't have funding for all that
@sepsap
3 ай бұрын
What about the law of attraction?
@Neonb88
11 ай бұрын
This guy has great promise. I bet he could be a mathematician some day
@allantourin
10 ай бұрын
tired of these sarcastic comments written by kids
@doorhandledestroyer
10 ай бұрын
@@allantourinyou don’t have to be serious or “formal” in a place like youtube lol
@abdullahhussain9675
10 ай бұрын
@@allantourin tired of people telling others who don't care that they're tired
@rohakdebnath8985
9 ай бұрын
@@allantourin ok and
@dhairyasood4109
9 ай бұрын
@@allantourinwho
@mqb3gofjzkko7nzx38
Жыл бұрын
I know where the function is zero at all times. I know this because I know where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), I obtain a difference, or deviation.. I use deviations to generate corrective equations to drive the function from a position where it is zero to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
@measthmatic_mathematics.
Жыл бұрын
What a nice explanation 🔥😁🤭
@Neonb88
11 ай бұрын
"Good hitting will always beat good pitching. And vice versa" - Yogi Berra
@zlatanibrahimovic8329
11 ай бұрын
this reminds me of a shrek scene
@RealGigaMind
11 ай бұрын
I understood that reference
@theblinkingbrownie4654
8 ай бұрын
For anyone wondering, this guy is a missile attacking the roots of the riemann zeta function.
@abhishankpaul
10 ай бұрын
Proof: If Reimann said this was true, it must be true. Hence, proved
@xinpingdonohoe3978
8 ай бұрын
That doesn't hold for Riemann. You need a stronger conjecture, like Ramanujan.
@nuruzzamankhan1610
8 ай бұрын
Ramanujan : I saw it in my dreams and/or it suddenly sparked in my mind out of nowhere. Hence it must be true. Proved.
@JohnDoe-ti2np
8 ай бұрын
Riemann only said that the hypothesis is "very likely" and that he "put aside the search for a proof after some fleeting vain attempts."
@souvik610
6 ай бұрын
Hey that's religion for you!
@sasx1487
4 ай бұрын
Proof by homie vibes
@AniketKumar-lw6su
Жыл бұрын
Why are so many people in the comments behaving like they are smarter than Terry Tao
@CalculusIsFun1
Жыл бұрын
People with huge egos who see people better than them, instead of aspiring to be like that person or at least try to get closer see them as a threat to their superiority complex mindset and feel the need to insult them as a self defense tactic.
@measthmatic_mathematics.
Жыл бұрын
I think it's all about their point views.... 🤗😌
@cantripleplays
Жыл бұрын
They are joking
@evanblake5252
11 ай бұрын
Some are, but not all. When a large portion of people are making idiots of themselves, the answer is pretty much never as simple as "everyone is joking". @@cantripleplays
@Neonb88
11 ай бұрын
@@cantripleplaysI was gonna say it's funny
@joaoalcantara6676
6 ай бұрын
If Tao says it, it's good enough for me. That's it, I give up trying to prove the Riemann Hypothesis today.
@EMERGINGGamer
Ай бұрын
no please keep on trying
@NomadUrpagi
9 күн бұрын
Hahaha "today" got me. Time for supper and some YT, don't wanna overload our brains.
@AlphaNumeric123
11 ай бұрын
Great insight. This also helps explain why scientist and luminaries are revered for uncovering what's now considered basic knowledge--they basically climbed the Himalayas without modern technology. A sherpa 200 years ago is more impressive than a modern tourist now with tons of gear and mountaineering equipment
@rohanpatel2828
7 ай бұрын
12th Fail
@Simpson17866
2 ай бұрын
Johannes Kepler accidentally did this in both directions simultaneously ;) When he first realized that oval-shaped orbits for the planets worked better than cycles of circles spiraling around each other, he initially ruled out ellipses (the simplest form of oval) because he assumed that if it was something so simple, then the ancient astronomers would've already discovered it for themselves. Then, when he found a complicated method of generating what he thought was a complicated form of oval, he realized that a lot of the complicated parts canceled out and created a simple ellipse after all :D
@DanyalShabirr
4 ай бұрын
bros tongue cant catch up to his brain😂
@poojapriti617
2 ай бұрын
You are laughing at him stammering and he is laughing at your iq
@BlueProgamer212
Ай бұрын
@@poojapriti617 nah if someone said that to me, I would take it as a compliment
@Prabhnoor-te3fm
24 күн бұрын
@@poojapriti617 he's not poking fun, it is a fact that his speech cannot match his speed of thinking
@samiloom8565
Жыл бұрын
I feel that this guy is very intelligent
@yewdimer1465
Жыл бұрын
He's considered to be one of the smartest people of all time...
@Yzjoshuwave
Жыл бұрын
I think I’ve heard he has a 226 IQ. Somewhere around there anyway.
@samiloom8565
Жыл бұрын
@@Yzjoshuwave wow god bless
@makssachs8914
Жыл бұрын
@@Yzjoshuwavecan I have a dna sample from him? I need to become superhuman too.
@TeFurto777
Жыл бұрын
@@samiloom8565 He was considered by Super Scholar to be one of the ten most brilliant minds in the world. His estimated IQ is 230 to 250. He was already taking classes at university at the age of 10, he finished his master's degree at the age of 16, then he did a postgraduate degree and at the age of 20 he finished his doctorate at Princeton. He was the youngest to participate in the IMO (International Mathematics Olympiad) at the age of 10, and remains the youngest to win 3 medals in the history of the IMO. He also won the Fields Medal, which is the equivalent of the Nobel of Mathematics.
@bigg.grizzlybear2670
11 ай бұрын
The answer is 6
@mrsillytacos
10 ай бұрын
🤣
@thebaldpizzaman6319
9 ай бұрын
Incorrect. You’re supposed to round to 2 digits, not just 1. The answer is 06.
Alex Honnold solves the extended Riemann hypothesis would be quite a revelation.
@watherby29
3 ай бұрын
There is always this one dude who will do a free solo on a vertical wall and make impossible possible
@srinivassridhar5151
2 ай бұрын
It's not about a vertical wall. And it's never just one dude.
@climbscience4813
Ай бұрын
@@srinivassridhar5151 Look up what Alex Honnold did. It is literally one guy and he essentially did the moon landing of climbing on his own. He obviously has people around him, but he did all the climbing, planning, training and so on.
@rachitchauhan8164
2 ай бұрын
If he is a mathematician he would work hard to get the tools, i mean you know we got differentiation, integration, complex numbers, someone made them. If you really are a mathematician you would try to find them, otherwise you are just a person who likes to solve problems which you can...
@jonnyadams1538
4 ай бұрын
freebooted from numberphile, shame on you :(
@alienz4254
12 күн бұрын
Classic Asian answer.. some white guy will figure it out don’t worry
@catmatism
Жыл бұрын
I don't even understand Reimann hypothesis or anything from Reimann. 😅
@frankj9270
Жыл бұрын
Reimann sums
@adw1z
11 ай бұрын
Riemann Hypothesis: All non-trivial zeros to the analytic continuation for the domain {s: Re(s) < 1} of the Riemann Zeta Function: Z(s) = 1 + 2^-s + 3^-s + ... for {s: Re(s) > 1} lie on the critical line {s: Re(s) = 1/2} in the critical strip {s: Re(s) in (0,1)}
@alex2005z
10 ай бұрын
@@adw1zand now in English please
@Felipe_Ribeir0
10 ай бұрын
@adw1z it is easy to copy and paste this, the meaning of it is the thing.
@adw1z
10 ай бұрын
@@Felipe_Ribeir0 I didn't copy and paste it, I wrote it in my own words - I've given 2 different presentations on the topic to my cohort, so i know what I'm talking about - and will study it again next term in greater detail in a further CA course
@voidzennullspace
5 ай бұрын
Yes, but even in his analogy there must be someone , something or multiple people to push forward and take the risk of climbing that sheer cliff face first, with seemingly impossible odds..... that's when real breakthroughs occur.
@admirljubovic6759
4 ай бұрын
True!
@dscheme3247
3 ай бұрын
You are misundertanding his analogy. If that happened it wouldn't be a breakthrough. It would be the result of some tedious and hard work but it probably wouldn't provide any insightful mathematical perspective. After all almost every mathematiciam thinks that the conjucture is true. I would say that to some extent fermat's last theorem is another good example
@voidzennullspace
3 ай бұрын
@@dscheme3247 "It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer." -Albert Einstein "If others would but reflect on mathematical truths as deeply and as continuously as I have, they would make my discoveries." -C.F. Gauss I didn't misunderstand anything. Just because T. Tao thinks the "tools aren't there" doesn't mean someone else who spends more time, effort, energy and so forth on the problem won't make some ground breaking discovery. Just look at what happened with Gregori Perelman and the Poincare Conjecture. Yes, tediousness and hard work is how you make progress dude. One of the many things I've been told by advisors in my PhD program is that resilience and dedication is very important. You can't just expect all problems to be solved via epiphany...you must work on your proofs diligently. Yes, Fermat's last theorem is a phenomenal example of a bunch of mathematicians working very hard for years to make small discoveries which ended up being key in solving the problem.
@emaddddd
6 ай бұрын
I already proved Riemann Hypothesis by multiplying both sides by Zero
@hudsondavid2261
Ай бұрын
However, Hilbert said that we must know, and will know.
@christophgouws8311
7 ай бұрын
His brain is so quick his mouth is lagging behind.
@Physics22KU
3 ай бұрын
His brain is being bottlenecked by his mouth.
@UnknownString88
3 ай бұрын
@@Physics22KUthankfully he doesn't need his mouth when he works on math
@maymkn
3 ай бұрын
Doesn't that happen to all of us?
@JordanLohoff
27 күн бұрын
@@maymkn No. Many people have mouths faster than their brains so the speak.
I think something like that happened for real once, with a prof giving out an unsolved conjecture to the students on an exam and somebody managed to prove it. Source: Read it somewhere on the Internet
@JordanLohoff
27 күн бұрын
@@wawawuu1514 it's happened a few times in history, but you're probably thinking Von Neumann
@wawawuu1514
27 күн бұрын
@@JordanLohoff A few times? Nice. Gotta look up that Von Neumann fella
@hijack29
11 ай бұрын
These can guys can solve problems in a week that it would take an average person months or years to solve
@supramayro434
10 ай бұрын
guys hear me out. leave that proof as an exercise for a reader
@sdoix
9 ай бұрын
lmao
@Redstoner34526
4 ай бұрын
Yes I have proved this hypothesis a long time ago, however it is so simple it would be a shame if others could not figure it out without outside help.
@Windowza
4 ай бұрын
If only you could use punctuation as well as you bullshit.
@shihab3611
11 ай бұрын
I think Terence Tao was talking about Collatz Conjecture and not Reimann Hypothesis in this video.
@lPlanetarizado
10 ай бұрын
its from numberphile, i think the question was if he is trying to prove the riemann hypotesis
@victorcossio
8 ай бұрын
Actually that applies for both
@rosiefay7283
7 ай бұрын
@@victorcossio They seem to be alike in that in each case neither proof nor disproof seems to be within easy reach. The difference is that settling the RH would be a great mathematical result; it would either simplify the preconditions of numerous other results, or else render them moot.
@Grizzly01-vr4pn
4 ай бұрын
@@rosiefay7283 A proof of the Collatz conjecture could be just as great. Not because so many other things hinge on it being true or not, but the development of the mathematical tools needed to prove it could be revolutionary.
@ianstopher9111
4 ай бұрын
No-one knows what the tools needed for the Collatz conjecture, but it is more likely that the tools for the Riemann hypothesis will have wider application. Same with the 196 problem.
@Supersmart-g8k
3 ай бұрын
Ace Mathematics
@Busterlanger1
9 ай бұрын
You ripped this straight from a numberphile video…lazy and cheap
@newaccount-cz6tb
7 ай бұрын
I found the answer, it is actually lim_x->0 (1/x)
@gurkiratsingh7tha993
8 ай бұрын
But i already solved it yesterday
@sebastianuhl
5 ай бұрын
Filthy Frank really turned himself around
@anthonybrakus5280
8 ай бұрын
This man is a rock star, mathematician par excellence. I could listen to Terrence speak all day.👍🏾
@maskedmarvyl4774
4 ай бұрын
And you Ciould listen to him all day, and get as much information as you got here.
@derciferreira2523
3 ай бұрын
He simply can´t.
@freashty
10 ай бұрын
There's a deep lesson here that has nothing to do with mathematics
@angrygary91298
6 ай бұрын
Idk what you heart about me intro to the video...I am the only one?
@thomas3224
4 ай бұрын
Bro is so smart it literally sounds like his mouth just cannot keep up with the speed of his mind
@SinergiasHolisticas
3 ай бұрын
wellcome to Kurt Godel!!!!!!!!!!!
@leolacic9442
5 күн бұрын
Celeron must be 35% low prise, then iCore 30% low prise. That's complete 65% low prise.
@rakshify
11 күн бұрын
So, how's that "opening" created if you aren't actually "trying"? Sometimes I just feel like no matter how good Indians and Chinese get in maths, they would always lack novelty... ofcourse barring a few exceptions.
@nampham162
8 ай бұрын
Engineers: addicted to numbers. They are satisfied as soon as they get the exact values. Astronomers: also interested in numbers, but they prefer approximated ones. As long as they get the right digits, they are satisfied. Physicists: Obsessed with the beauty of laws. In order to get their favorite equations, they are willing to do reckless approximations. Substituting numbers into equations is engineers' task. Mathematicians: Just need to know if the problem is solvable or not. As soon as they find the problem is (not) solvable, they lose interest.
@calicoesblue4703
3 ай бұрын
What about Inventors???
@AxiomTutor
19 күн бұрын
I think of it by analogy to physics. Imagine trying to invent thermo-dynamics before the time of Aristotle, say. They just didn't have the concepts. They didn't even have the mathematization of physics. They didn't even know that there were atoms or what they would be like. You just had to wait for math to develop the connection between algebra and geometry, and then wait for people to study the mathematics of constant acceleration, and then wait for people to invent telescopes precise enough to measure the motions of planets, and wait for someone with the patience and resources willing to devote a team of people for several years, to record measurements more precise than anyone thought useful. And that barely gets you in position to discover what Newton discovered.
@binaboro8290
2 ай бұрын
If you can't solve the Riemann hypothesis then you are not smart at all.......... Only a great mind can solve the Riemann hypothesis which this guy is clearly not
@1986verity
3 ай бұрын
Can I use this as a reference on exam?
@calicoesblue4703
3 ай бұрын
Hahaha🤣🤣🤣😎👍
@drsolo7
4 ай бұрын
However unlike scaling without handholds, you won't die falling multiple times
@hindipoemsbyvivek5352
7 күн бұрын
Well Said. There is an age when everything looks possible. When I was 14, I spent 2 years trying to solve Fermat's last theorem. With age, comes maturity to pick your battles selectively
@QuillPGall
Ай бұрын
for my complex analysis course, my professor left a joke bonus point question on a homework telling us to prove the riemann hypothesis thereby validating the prime number theorem. i made up an “elaborate” 3-page proof that dabbled in algebraic topology, group theory, and a bunch of other nonsense. he still gave me the point just for the insanity of it haha
@Moondog1109
Ай бұрын
I have the tools, novel pedagogy, it's true, I can prove that Li(x) and pi(x) are identities. I have to write it up but I have no idea how to disseminate it. No credentials
@isaiahvita6418
3 ай бұрын
Terrence Howard has already proved it
@JordanLohoff
27 күн бұрын
😂
@sebastiangudino9377
3 ай бұрын
It is also a frustrating problem. It's almost trivially true (Not trivially, it is actually a pretty surprising result! But yeah, you can just take a peek at thr complex plain and say "Yeah, that makes sense"). But as tao said, we just don't have the tools to prove it It is like with polynomials, we "knew" for a long time that there was no quintic. But we needed galois theory (A branch of abstract algebra, very unrelated to polynomials) to actually prove it. We need a new "galois theory" type aproach, coming from a part of math not yet developed
@user-qy8ib4ef1g
Ай бұрын
Galois theory is very unrelated to polynomials?
@sebastiangudino9377
Ай бұрын
@@user-qy8ib4ef1g Have you not taken Galois Theory? It is a branch of group theory, sure. But one of it's most common applications is to characterize the solvability of polynomials
@user-qy8ib4ef1g
Ай бұрын
@sebastiangudino9377 of course galois theory is related to polynomials. I was questioning your statement ("a branch of abstract algebra, very unrelated to polynomials")
@sebastiangudino9377
Ай бұрын
@@user-qy8ib4ef1g Because it's tools are not algebra tools, but rather group theory tools. I do see the misunderstanding, I might edit the comment to clarify, thanks!
@coniferous4637
8 ай бұрын
But… if one is a cutting edge math mathematician, what kind of openings could one be waiting for? Wouldn’t he be the one looking for the openings?
@cara-seyun
8 ай бұрын
Nah, that’s for some grad student to figure out, then he can swoop in
@faleru
2 ай бұрын
Why not invent the tools
@boogieman6529
2 ай бұрын
Dreams
@michaelzimmermann3388
2 ай бұрын
He makes it sound like ordinary people like I can understand what he means, but in fact I have no real clue. (I have a phd in physics)
@OllyJ70
24 күн бұрын
Do you think that one day AI may be used to help generate proofs for these previously improved theories?
@elreturner1227
Ай бұрын
I’d argue discovering new math is like climbing a foggy mountain where you climb up one side and there is a ravine with no bridge and the you climb up the other side and there is still a ravine with no bridge and the kicker is you don’t even know if there’s a bridge
@SpaghettiToaster
2 ай бұрын
Wasn't this excerpt about the collars conjecture, not the Riemann hypothesis?
@killerqueenisbestmanneko8419
7 күн бұрын
Personality i have started trying to have a revelation in order to find the solution. Promising so far.
@KamzhiLearning
4 күн бұрын
it feels like he is so smart that his thoughts are racing way too fast in his mind and he has to manually suppress his words and return to what he was saying
@phieyl7105
6 ай бұрын
I knyow where da function goes nyull at all times, uwu. I knyow this 'cause I knyow where it doesn't, nyaa~. By subtracting where it is fwom where it isn't, or where it isn't fwom where it is (whichever is biggew), I get a diffewence, or deviation, owo. I use deviations to make cowwective squiggles to push da function fwom a place where it's nyull to a place where it isn't, and getting to a place where it wasn't, it now is, uwu. So, da place where it is, is nyow da place that it wasn't, and it fowwows that da place that it was, is nyow da place that it isn't, owo.
@Gold139
9 күн бұрын
tao is a wise man. this is true in a lot of fields as well. the technology has to be there to assist a lot of discoveries.
@Eta_Carinae__
8 ай бұрын
I think that the more I learn about math history, the more I feel like the greats of the field were exceptions to Tao's general method here. They really were crazy enough to develop new deep tools to solve apparently trivial problems, and they'll take a decade to write that whole paper.
@ruminantdastellar7740
9 ай бұрын
He talks the way my mother would get mad at me if I do
@Balsieur
Ай бұрын
Give the smartest mathematicians heroic doses of mushrooms.
@gitgudnga
9 ай бұрын
this was kinda the sentiment with mathematicians and p vs np
@TheLeekWeek
8 ай бұрын
Maybe the Batman can prove it - we have a math class on our channel.
@pastaplatoon6184
8 ай бұрын
I got this guys, hold my beer.
@ACoupleStoners
16 күн бұрын
Has anyone posed this question to Chat Gpt o1?
@TriPham-j3b
Ай бұрын
Electrodynamics if you weight less then the lift force of F
@davidespinosa1910
Ай бұрын
So how will an opening occur ? By accident ?
@AZERTYUIOPQSDFGHJKLMXCVBN
2 ай бұрын
why does this guy talk exactly like elon musk
@macnolds4145
5 ай бұрын
Terry Tao, easily the best and most prolific mathematical genius of our time, isn't saying, "If I can't do it, then no one can." Instead, he's saying, "Someone has to get lucky/clever first and figure out a possiblr strategy or avenue for progress. Once that's done, I-- and a few others-- could see whether or not this leads to a proof. But it would probably not get us that far."
@ianstopher9111
4 ай бұрын
You have to look at the convoluted proof of Fermat's Last theorem via Taniyama-Shimura-Weil conjecture, Frey curves, the epsilon conjecture before finally Wiles and Taylor. All of these earlier pieces were the handholds to scale.
@nissimlevy5476
2 ай бұрын
So if he's so smart then why doesn't he create this breakthrough? Why is he waiting for someone else to provide the beakthrough?
@SpaghettiToaster
2 ай бұрын
The breakthroughs usually happen passively through research in formerly completely unrelated topics.
@NicholsonNeisler-fz3gi
2 ай бұрын
Stop making excuses and just prove it. Invent new math or something.
@boogieman6529
2 ай бұрын
String theorists are doing that job don't worry
@a0z9
8 ай бұрын
Comprate una dímelo y unos tacos químicos para ir poniendo anillas
@Avegeania
5 ай бұрын
Proof: Multiply both sides by n. Let's assume n=0, because why not. Lhs=Rhs, Hence proved.
@numberandfacts6174
29 күн бұрын
Yes create a new math tool for Riemann hypothesis is best way to solve it
@thegreatreverendx
5 ай бұрын
I could listen to this guy stammer all day.
@thuongthuong4457
Ай бұрын
They fail at something so ordinary
@iizvullok
2 ай бұрын
I have a proof for the Riemann hypothesis, but i leave it as a trivial exercise for the viewer.
@michaelwright8410
8 ай бұрын
Say that analogy to Alex Honnold lol
@SixtysymbolsSymbols
10 күн бұрын
I will solve inshallah one day my dream from the class of 4 th i will
@XYZWU
8 күн бұрын
May allah assist you in your Journey akhi , I really hope you achieve it one day 🎉
@elietheprof5678
3 ай бұрын
When I try to explain this to boomers they call me a quitter
@GursimarSinghMiglani
Ай бұрын
This dude irritates me with how he speaks
@orangejuice7964
9 күн бұрын
what about the other Terrence
@TruthOfZ0
4 ай бұрын
I have solved the Riemann Hypothesis using its conjucate as a tool ... ζ(s)=Α(s)*ζ(1-s)..where Α(s)=1 makes all Re(s)=1/2 ... in both s from ζ and A ...done!
@HTJFilms
15 күн бұрын
The proof is read to the reader as an exercise
@Supersmart-g8k
3 ай бұрын
I will solve this conjecture
@UnknownString88
3 ай бұрын
Is it generally accepted as true?
@stevendebettencourt7651
10 ай бұрын
There's another dark possibility to keep in mind about all of this: Godel's Incompleteness Theorem shows that in any consistent system like mathematics, there will be things that are true, but are not able to be proved. Ever. Is the Riemann Hypothesis an example of this in action? Or are we just waiting for the next Ribet to find a bridge to solving this? I would hope it's the latter. "We will know. We must know."
@zkprintf
8 ай бұрын
What do you mean by "statement P is true" if P cannot be proven nor disproven? Gödel's theorem states that in any complicated enough (I don't remember the exact definition of being complicated enough) system one can express a statement P that cannot be proven and cannot be disproven. There is nothing dark here. The existence of an unmeasurable subset of ℝ is such an example for the ZF system. Now you may add the axiom of choice and build a Vitali set or add the axiom of determinacy and show that all subsets of ℝ are Lebesgue measurable. If the same turns out to be true about the Riemann's hypothesis, we'll just explore what axioms may be added to our system to yield the hypothesis true/false.
@cara-seyun
8 ай бұрын
Fortunately, we know it’s not unprovable, since the Riemann function is analytic
@Huuuuuuue
7 ай бұрын
@@zkprintfWouldn't a statement like RH being false require the existence of a counterexample, thus making it trivially provable by finding the counterexample? Therefore if the statement is undecidable then it must be true?
@zkprintf
7 ай бұрын
@@Huuuuuuue Well, what you propose sounds intuitive, but it's more complicated than that. The thing about something like the set of real numbers is, it's way too complex (no pun intended). We choose some axiom schemes, rules of inference and try to deduce interesting statements. But dozens of axiom schemes are far too little to describe something like the Real numbers. Matter of fact, if you choose a computational model like the Turing machine you won't be able to compute most of the Real numbers! (One may think of this as: if you choose a language, you won't be able to describe most of the Real numbers). Interestingly, this is a trivial fact: the set of Real numbers is a continuum, while programs/formulas are countable. And the set of Real numbers is not a physical object we can explore using experiments. You don't "grab a set of Real numbers" and start exploring it. You take some assumptions, rules of inference and make conclusions from them. This is a distinction between physics and mathematics needed to be understood. It's not the set that we explore per se (it doesn't exists like physical matter does), it's the statements about the set that we explore. Now let's imagine there is a non-constructive proof there exists a complex number for whom the RH fails. Would that imply there exists a proof that shows an example of such a number to break the RH? No! There are only countable proofs and numbers we can describe. It is not implied that one of them is a counterexample. It may be that none of this countable proofs shows a counterexample yet we proved the RH wrong. If you see a paradox here you view mathematical objects as something they are not. Which is fine, it is not obvious. But building mathematics from ground zero is a problem that has been deeply explored and mostly solved in the 20th century. Reading about the Foundations of Mathematics should clear everything up. Disclaimer: Despite this, the RH itself is proved to be equivalent to another statement about natural numbers that is easily verifiable for any fixed natural number. Thus additional things may be said in this specific case. But this is in no way a trivial fact and is not true for arbitrary hypothesis.
@calicoesblue4703
3 ай бұрын
@@zkprintfI like the disclaimer 😎
@TheSharpSword1
Жыл бұрын
he seems very smart i think he should start to learn math he will be great mathmatician i belive him
@PowerUpStudio_
Ай бұрын
I mean he's kinda right
@prodbyryshy
6 ай бұрын
Terence Tao: on solving 2+2
@yoyoyogames9527
10 ай бұрын
NUMBERPHILE VIDEO BTW
@jbperez808
6 күн бұрын
Alex Honnold
@Number6_
3 ай бұрын
No solution is no solution, but management does not want to here that.
Пікірлер: 708