Відео

Twist on Twist, actually. 9999.... is not eaxtly equal 1 .

I did in mind in 4-5 sec

I’d say 0:x=y when x=0 it would be every x

Order of operations

dy/dx is a limit that would be a 0/0 an indeterminate form

I do not have to prove that ".99..." is not 1, only that the proposition that ".99..." is 1 is not valid. That the sum of infinite positive terms is a unique and precise value is not valid. That ".99..." is rational due to the definition of rational numbers is not valid. That there is no number between ".99..." and 1 is not valid. That infinite 9's or any non zero digits to the right of the radix point is an integer is not valid. That the use of the equal sign in ".99..."=1 is the same as it used in (number)=(number) is not valid. Those are some of the basics I refer to [in many previous comments and replies]. The burden of proof is necessary when you change basics.

The problem in Calculus is the limit. Words like approaching do not prove something will ever equal. "As close as desired" might mean a number "next to". Then the Archimedean property takes over. It is difficult, using base 10 digits, to show that there are numbers between ".99..." and 1. Each number base has this problem. (".(b-1)(b-1)..." approaches 1). You could then find many numbers between ".99..." and 1, one in each number base higher than 10. (1/16^n, 1/20^n or 1/60^n are closer to 0 than 1/10^n) [What about "at infinity"? What is infinity? Infinity is incomplete, inconsistent and indefinite]

zero

0:00 Integers and whole numbers are literally the same thing: A whole unit number of something. That’s, what an integer is; and that’s, what a whole number is. The central set should have been called: ”Natural Numbers”. 😅

No man zero mean you have none So if you divide none by none You get none You took your math with Terrance Howard Stop overthinking it If you have none You still have none 😂

You deserve to be famous as you managed to explain this in 4 minutes

The 0th root of 0...

Infinity is not a real number tho

Thank you very much. This is an eyeopener, indeed.

Higher order differential terms don't exist. They can't hurt you. -Physicist

-1/12, theory given by Srinivasa Ramanujan

I’ve really wondered about this since taking my first class on differential equations several years ago, and even more since then as this idea has come up in all my physics courses, and this video finally put to rest that query that I’ve never gotten a good explanation for. Thank you so much! This has really helped me a lot.

So if you have an infinite number of objects, there are 2.5 ways to arrange them? Can you list them for us?

Another shill video for Brilliant

Blossom

The Math Sorcerer would be proud.

I didnt understand anything❤❤❤

That makes perfect sense. I mean if I divide something by nothing, the proposition is un"defined" bc the result can be "ANYTHING" It holds infinite number of possibilities. How can one even "define" infinite possibilities tho. U cant pin point anything. Good one.

I was expecting -1/12 for some reason

Can please someone tell me why the limit of (1+1/x²)^x is 1?

How can a divergent series be equal to anything?

But using gamma function, I can't find factorial of 1/3

Math, saying that ".99..." is 1, is like a builder constructing over the n'th floor decides he no longer needs the building beneath for support and goes freestyle.

❤❤

Proving this you used the chain rule which actually uses the derivatives as fractions too. You used the thing you are trying to prove as an esencial part of the proof. In the chain rule (du/dy)x(dy/dx), dy just cancels out like a fraction as well

its parallel to both axis

It's 1/e not e^-pi/2😂

This will be always smaller than 1

Allah razı olsun ❤🎉

But, isn’t the chain rule a consequence of treating dy/dx as a fraction?

this is a result of treating infinity as a regular number. S = infinity if, S = 1 + 9S 9S = nine times infinity = infinity 1 + infinity = infinity S = S special rules like this are the reason why zero and infinity are later additions to maths. they needed to figure out how to implement them without breaking the fundamentals of maths. it's not like the concept of nothing was unknown to mathematicians until someone discovered zero.

Wow

When i have 168 cards in UNO deck

1-1 + 1-1 for infinity is 0 because 0+0+0 etc is 0. 2A = 0, because 2*0 is 0. 1-A=A is nonsense. That's saying 1-0=0.

This only works when a = 1 (the quadratic equation has its coefficient of x^2 as 1)

Look at the pattern of the running subtotals 1/2 3/4 7/8 … (2^n-1)/2^n = 1 - (1/(2^n)) a smaller and smaller fraction less than one.

😢🎉

While adding B to B why he shift one B to right

One approaches infinity faster than the other

soO On 😂😂

Bro but why there exits an extragenous root Is there a domain for w(xe^x)=x As till second last step 3 satisfies but after introducing lambert function [ whose domain is -1/e to infinity which is satisfies] and using xe^x, 3 is not yet the soln As solving in elegant way always requires each step to be accurate

Don't show this to your calculus teacher

Teacher: There is nothing greater than infinite Vsauce: OR IS IT!!!

i havent watched the video but it seems like the 0th root is impossible as the root0 of x can be rewritten as x^(1/0) and division by 0 isn't possible

It's a fraction. There's a weird philosophical bullshit around this because of the whole division by zero thing, but if you treat it like a fraction, it works. If people could just be honest, calculus is based on the idea that sometimes you can divide by zero, as long as you don't look directly at the zero.