💜

Great explanations Towards my finals and this is super duper helpful Thank you!!

Too bad to not see addressed a current big problems, students being incorrectly accused of cheating. A lot of teachers don't understand how "modern" cheating works, but they think they do, so they make unfounded accusations based on bad info. There was a recent case of a high-end university prof failing something like half the class because some "cheat detecting" program he used told him that they had all used AI to write a paper. It was demonstrated that this wasn't the case (there were people who cheated with AI in that class, but they weren't the ones he thought were cheating). It's horrible to be accused of cheating based on "my app tells me you cheated and I know it's right" when you didn't. Admin also is tech ignorant, all you have to do is say "the algorithm told me she cheated" and they automatically believe if, never heard of GIGO, etc.

1-2-4-8-16-32-64, it takes 7 iterations to exceed the total of 52 cards

thank you sir. you clearly explained.

I was banging my head trying to understand the jacobian cuz it was introduced with the chain rule topic in my school. This video just made it very easy to undertand now. Thank you very much

Teacher, where are the exercises to put on practice my knowledge? 🥺

Really makes you think about lands in MTG

Such clear explanation. I couldn’t understand anything my professor said in class but you made it so easy to learn. Thank you so much!

The way I've always thought of it is that when you have two cards adjacent to each other in the initial order (a card and the card that's one away from it), you put approximately one card in between them (so it's approximately two away). With the next shuffle, you put approximately one card in between each of the ones that are there from the first shuffle, so it's approximately four away, doubling with each shuffle. That got me to the same criterion of needing to have two to the number of shuffles exceed 52.

@9:00 Why wouldn't the smallest magnitude be at 180 degrees where COS -theta would be minus- 1?

Sir I have a general question, why we can not solve tan x or cot x function in non homogeneous term in undetermined co-efficients process ?? If anyone who sees my question if you know please response ...

Thank you so much at 2024!

From a psychological point of view, the bonnie and Clyde varient the game is a better allegory for acting cooperatively in that if neither confess, it leads to the only non-negitive outcome. Nothing negative results. If you confess you are just lessening the duration of the consequences.

Good explanation ❤❤❤

goat.

Is there a mathematical demonstration supporting y=e^(rx) ? I'm of the conviction that mathematics doesn't rely on guesswork or chance.

love from India. Your videos are really helpful for our engineering and statistical entrance examinations.

Why is the magnitude of the gradient vector said to be the RATE of maximum ascent? When I see "rate", I think slope. Why isn't the rate of ascent simply the partial of y divided by the partial of x.? Isn't this the slope of the gradient....i.e. change in y over the change in x? What am I missing? thanks

It's not true that the gaussian integral's value is √ π/2! I can prove it rong 👩‍🚒

2(2+1) is a parenthetic statement. Until the integer preceding the parentheses is equal to 1, we are not done with the parenthetical. The multplication indicated by the parentheses takes priority because it is part of the parenthetical statement. Eliminating the parentheses is the first step in the order of operations. Although poorly written, if the order of operations is correctly applied it is not ambiguous.

Or use the most common method: lay cards on the table (face up) and mix them, then alternate cuts and shuffles. Much ado about little.

U did nothing, how did u sketch it

Oh im so fucked.

Did you ever work with standalone, so the individual files can also be generated into a PDF on their own, not just as part of the whole document? Especially with subimport, I've found it quite useful to write multi-part documents/my thesis documentations.

I am so grateful I found your channel tata 😭 God bless you!

Thanks man, got a 90 on my final

I like to think of tracing the top card and where it might go. If you ripple perfectly, it's in one of the top 2 positions after 1 shuffle. After another it could be as low as 4. After n merges, the deepest it could be is 2*n. So it takes 5 for it to possibly be in the bottom half of the deck, one more for it to be at any position in the deck but there are likely significant differences in probability at different parts of the deck. A 7th merge would greatly equal out that probability

Thank you. You cured my brain. I’m going to go study now ✌️

Her: I only date bad boys. Him: shuffles deck of cards eight times

Was lost on the last two videos I watched but these concrete examples are great. Thinking of it as a particle moving across a vector field is very helpful

Shuffle, cut 1/3, shuffle, cut 2/3, repeat.

Indeed

I think you're a genius simply because you can write all of this stuff backwards.

10:21 ne^(-n^2), Would using root test faster? I really hate using integral test.

awesome ❤❤

Great exposition of a difficult concept, Dr. Bazett Subs from India

Can you make a video about adding embeded videos in beamer presentation that does not use Flash Player.

You actually need to cut in thirds and restock prior to cutting in half for shuffling. That will reduce top and. Bottom portions that have less movement,ent.

H4 probably age is over 50 💀

I just love the comparison with the either or thing...need real life example to make sense out of it..I see no sense in P been false and Q been True and conclusion True...sincerely..

Cool video, but I have an easier method for random shuffle. Throw the cards around and play 52 card pickup. By the time you are done, you can give it a quick shuffle and have it be random, and also not want to play anymore.

Ok, now can you work out this problem with a Skip-bo pack please?

that's a really cool shirt! 😂

How you not going to solve the last example. disgrace to differential equations.

52! = 8.0658175170943878571660636856404e+67 I did this using my Scientific setting on my PC. I know it's only an approximation, but at least it's not in infinite progression like say π

Suppose I remove one edge connecting AB. Consider path CBDBAC. Isn't this an Euler circuit? Why doesn't this contradict the Theorem at 4:45?

0:51 wouldn't that basically be a giant-sized Birthday Paradox? I feel like the odds of a truly shuffled deck to have been shuffled in the same order before is greater than you'd think. Still very small.

this lesson is gooooooood!1!!1!!

What's sort of funny is that I always do 8 shuffles, just because it suits my OCD tenancies better. In poker, it's good practice to cut before each shuffle (presumably to reduce the chance of stacking a deck), and after the 4th, the whole deck is cut into four pieces and stacked on each other, then more shuffles are done. Instead of doing just three after that point, I just go for a full four extra. It doesn't take much time. At any rate, I can be confident a deck is shuffled at that point. :)