Literally 2 minutes into the video and my brain is already exploding with realization. This video is amazing, thank you so much for making it!
@eddiejennings52627 күн бұрын
This series is a joy! Thank you, sir.
@zachdingman843318 күн бұрын
For whatever reason groups have been like brain Velcro for me for the last year or so, I can’t understand them very well but I also can’t stop thinking about them, so thank you for creating a form of entertainment that helps to bridge the gap!
@eddiejennings526219 күн бұрын
Professor Macauley, I'm a Clemson Math Sciences PhD from 1995. I slogged through Abstract Algebra; I appreciated other areas of math much more. I found your website and these talks; they are wonderful. Thank you, I have new found appreciation and joy in this material. Thank you!
@ChuanChihChou21 күн бұрын
8:05 Hmm, it's not obvious to me that the corollary follows the "One orbit theorem"? The "One orbit theorem" only guarantees that there is an isomorphism ϕ from Q(r_1) -> Q(r_2) s.t. ϕ(r_1) = r_2 There is no (obvious) guarantee that such isomorphism can be extended into an automorphism of the splitting field, say Q(r_1, r_2)...
@ChuanChihChou24 күн бұрын
New time traveller fantasy: Go back in time and snipe Galois' opponent of the duel to let him live longer. What would happen to the field (ha!) of abstract algebra? 🤔
@jessicapriscilacerqueiraba349325 күн бұрын
great explanation
@julianduron567125 күн бұрын
Thanks for lecture 2.2!!! I now understand lecture 2.1 propositions and logical operators.
@girlsinacoma27 күн бұрын
Pls prove Galois theorem
@forheuristiclifeksh783628 күн бұрын
1:00 why cube comeout? how so?s
@zhulerАй бұрын
in 31:05 it's easy to prove that conjugation of a p-subgroup is also a p-subgroup, so the only orbit is not bigger than np but equal to np
@ChuanChihChouАй бұрын
3:04 The automatically generated chapter name is wrong :( "Ceelo" -> Sylow theorem
@samueldeandrade8535Ай бұрын
Hehehe. A fan of ambigrams, huh? Lovely.
@thimmareddyv966Ай бұрын
hi sir, please share worksheet solutions link
@julianduron5671Ай бұрын
Thanks for saying that at the end 47:04. Because I did not understand the combinatorial proof but i loved the algebraic method.
@homeworkhelper976Ай бұрын
God squad algebra playlist
@okoyoso2 ай бұрын
Great!
@tokyostreams79822 ай бұрын
8:05 how 2 •3 = 1 and not 6
@catharperfect70362 ай бұрын
Beautiful, sexy, delicious lecture.
@zhuler2 ай бұрын
great videos!🥰
@aidanokeeffe79282 ай бұрын
I got so stuck on group theory, having had pandemic-aggravated senioritis when I was studying it for the first time. I'm hoping this will fill the gaps.
@DrPG1992 ай бұрын
@1:26 It was a DUEL, not a "dual".
@ChuanChihChou2 ай бұрын
Gerrymandering of group theory
@ChuanChihChou3 ай бұрын
29:00 Not the most natural choice of generators of A_5, not S_5! 😅
@juniorcyans29883 ай бұрын
It’s time for me, an incoming senior physics student, to teach myself and be ready for quantum physics. I didn’t and I won’t take undergraduate level linear algebra. It’s not required for my physics major, and it might be too “easy”. I’m so glad that I found your channel! This is exactly I need to learn in this summer! ❤❤❤❤
@vikumvichakshanaFsv43 ай бұрын
Sir, I have small question about in 22.27 part ,In that part you say c1*cost +c2 *sin t =0 should c1=c2=0 ,but sir, we can select t=45degree in firstcodrent and c1=-1 and c2=1 ' ifthatcase we canget zero answer for that statement without c1=c2 =0 ,cam you explane that?🤨
@dhavalfuria2743Ай бұрын
The right-hand-side is not the scalar 0, but the vector 0 (constant function 0, in this case). Thus, c_1 cos(t) + c_2 sin(t) = 0 is equality of functions, not numbers. In other words, it holds for all values of t Substituting t = pi/4 gives c_1 + c_2 = 0 c_1 = -1, c_2 = 1 is one of its solutions, but so is c_1 = 0, c_2 = 0 Note that c_1 = 0, c_2 = 0 is the only solution that works for all values of t (as is shown in the video). Hence, c_1 = 0, c_2 = 0 is the only solution to the vector equation c_1 cos(t) + c_2 sin(t) = 0 Thoughts?
@rage4dorder3 ай бұрын
This is great! Looking forward to your upcoming book!
If all algebraic numbers can be expressed using radicals, why should we have a formual for the roots of any degree n polynomial? Can anybody prove it?
@GustavoPinho894 ай бұрын
Proszę bardzo, Bro!!! Thanks for coming back
@k-universe00224 ай бұрын
best Explanation ever 👌👍👍👏
@stevexm92534 ай бұрын
From the exercise for finding inverses using the Caley diagram, the fourth example (3:56) where (r^2f)^-1 = r^2f, its own inverse; from the diagram isn’t it also true that the inverse is simply equal to fr, implying the relation r^2f = fr ?
@Noah-jz3gt5 ай бұрын
Think I can finish all your differential equation lectures probably tomorrow. I really appreciate you for offering such an excellent lecture for completely free! Thank you so much again!
@simianomatlaldo90225 ай бұрын
2:52 no clue how you got to that at all
@josenaeliton55095 ай бұрын
In the "proof" that √2 is not a rational número using Galois theory you need to know that {1,√2} is a basis for Q(√2). Otherwise the automorphism isn't well defined. But it's the same as knowing that √2 isn't rational.
@Noah-jz3gt5 ай бұрын
For me, it seems like type 1 and type 2 are identical. If u(0, t) = u(pi, t) = 0, then automatically ux(0, t) = ux(pi, t) = 0. Also if I start with ux(0, t) = ux(pi, t) = 0, this leads to u(0, t) = k1, u(pi, t) = k2 where k1 and k2 are some constants. Then it's equivalent to the previous case, dirichlet condition with different boundary values. Can anyone explains more about this?
@shaisimonson33306 ай бұрын
Motivating the normalizer by quantifying the notion of normality through voting is a great pedagogical start.
@jiahao27096 ай бұрын
I think using a simple example is better for understanding instead using the Rubiks cube
@Noah-jz3gt6 ай бұрын
Beautiful lecture! Thank you!
@Noah-jz3gt6 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for providing these high quality lectures for free! I'm really expecting to take your another lecture Math 4340 after finishing this one.
@Noah-jz3gt6 ай бұрын
at 22:25, isn't it supposed to be +1/4 not -1/4?
@Czeckie6 ай бұрын
26:00 what if we don't assume separation of variables? is there a solution that doesn't separate like this? how would we find it?
@Noah-jz3gt6 ай бұрын
Oh shit Thanks A LOT for an excellent lecture! I was so lost but you saved me!
@carlosraventosprieto20656 ай бұрын
this was AMAZING thank you so much you are an incredible teacher! i have my exam on monday and this video helped me a lot in terms of the ides behind it. greetings from spain