dmkoslicki

Пікірлер

@MohamedSayedKamel2 11 сағат бұрын

This video is so beautiful, thanks.

@ProfessorJDawg Күн бұрын

Thank You so much for the STRONG explanation. You sir are a saint.

@MohamedSayedKamel2 18 күн бұрын

Why 9 dislikes? This doesn't make sense.

@fjtam8406 22 күн бұрын

thank you that's helpful

@NahidulIslam-l2n 27 күн бұрын

Noice...

@veereshsir1224 Ай бұрын

Excellent explanation

@oussamafes9542 Ай бұрын

@Htman Ай бұрын

Thank you so much for these videos.

@Htman Ай бұрын

Besides it being declarative, If it leaves you hanging or wondering what something stands for, it is not a proposition. "This statement is false" is not a proposition because even though it is declarative, it begs the question, "Which statement?".

@scali5948 Ай бұрын

Saved me thanks!!

@ro_ddr4 Ай бұрын

Im in tears right now, 1 month trying to understand this god bless you

@voltaire8828 2 ай бұрын

what an incredible teacher! your explanation are really straightforward which makes my discrete math course just so so much easier

@phandinhthanh2295 2 ай бұрын

My discrete math textbook says that logical equivalence is not a logical operation(or logical connective) while biconditional is a logical operation. The statement 'p is logically equivalent to q' is the statement that 'the biconditional p <-> q is a a tautology'. A biconditional can be either true or false while a tautology is always true.

@owowowowoaa 2 ай бұрын

Porfa vuelveee :C

@VMANFdo 2 ай бұрын

Thanks sir well explained

@Code-y4v 2 ай бұрын

Thank you so much 🙏🏿

@GodwillhandleIT 3 ай бұрын

I'm really struggling, I don't know how I'm suppose to complete the entire discrete math logic class in two months. It's going to take at least 6 months to understand the fundamentals and terminology, I'm so discouraged.

@ZainabAnwar-j6k 3 ай бұрын

You are literally such an underrated teacher.. everyone's teaching same thing but they way u teach makes the whole thing simplee... Need your Instagram to get in touch with u

@ZainabAnwar-j6k 3 ай бұрын

If anyone is watching this video, then note my words... He is the best teacher in case of teaching strong induction.... I haven't experienced his other videos but he teaches strong induction v well

@alitahir2160 4 ай бұрын

Thank you!

@angieg7257 4 ай бұрын

Your videos are really great!

@MyOneFiftiethOfADollar 5 ай бұрын

WLOG or Without Loss of Generality is superfluous commentary for a proof that could have been written better without it. For example your opposite parity proof could have been written more clearly via modular arithmetic avoiding tedious case by case approach. modulo 2 x and y have "opposite parity" Therefore x==1 and y==0 Adding the two congruences gives x+y == 1 modulo 2 implies x+y = 2k+1 QED Your wordy proof is useful for those who have not learned modular arithmetic.

@Gwizz1027 5 ай бұрын

Dude. I love you.

@stviz87 5 ай бұрын

Can't stand the high squeaks , had to turn it off

@eliasali635 5 ай бұрын

I wish there was CMPSC360 in summer 24. This is great!

@yeh9718 5 ай бұрын

thanks for sharing, this video is excellent

@DOOMSLAYER8055 6 ай бұрын

Thank you sir.

@RobertturtleMcNugget 6 ай бұрын

Loved the vid, not sure what you're writing or if you're writing backwards but still amazing vid

@pseudolullus 6 ай бұрын

The vid has probably been mirrored, notice how he is writing with his left hand.

@skroy1 6 ай бұрын

What is this?

@amandatheyahoo411 6 ай бұрын

At 1:06 I can see them!! Wow. Good job!!!

@woodstockman6972 6 ай бұрын

Don't see anything

@razibhaque4480 7 ай бұрын

Outstanding!

@knightning3521 7 ай бұрын

waste of my time imo, its great that youve shown the conclusion of strong induction. but if you already knew the induction step was true then you didnt need this video.

@arasukiasyan1 7 ай бұрын

you made this very simple thanks

@juvia1773 7 ай бұрын

HOW ARE U WRITING?!?!? HOW R U BENEATH THE SCREEN

@chidochiradza 8 ай бұрын

This deserves a million views and likes

@santiagoalzate3446 8 ай бұрын

Quick question, is it just a norm to use implies when using the for all quantifier? Or why would it be wrong to say for all x: H(x) and M(x) when translating the example?