Very good lecture! I never really understood the BSD conjecture before, but now I feel like I have a pretty good handle on what it says. Hope I can prove it someday, or at least some key results leading up to its proof.
@mashmax984 жыл бұрын
there are some really weird videos in your favs
@ashutoshchakravarty26693 жыл бұрын
@@mashmax98 💀 dude is obsessed with feet
@davidwilkie9551 Жыл бұрын
Prizes for Academic work are a bit of a mystery to students who have their skills in agriculture or physical activity, so the idea of an approach to Mathematical Conjecture from a Condensation Chemistry POV is more effective than turning the pages of recorded history.
@georgemissailidis31604 жыл бұрын
12:05 that solution there is actually a special case of a more general theorem. Use the fact that: (m² - n²)² + (2mn)² = (m² + n²)² for all m, n. Now divide both sides by (m² + n²)². The case in the video is m=s and n=1.
@AnitaSV4 жыл бұрын
s=m/n in your equal m and n are integers, in this it is rational. So effectively they both cover all solutions.
@kidzbop38isstraightfire924 жыл бұрын
Sorry for the very dumb question, but why is Eq. (1) in his video y = s(x + 1) ? I thought the slope is y = mx + b....so how did we determine that the slope (s) is equal to the y-intercept (b)? I feel like I missed something very easy but I can't find where I went wrong. Is it because the unit circle has a y-intercept at {0,1}? Why then cant we use y = s(x - 1), since {0,-1} is also a y-intercept?
@hvok99 Жыл бұрын
@@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 No bad questions. You are right that the equation of a line is given by y = mx+b, and slope defined as rise over run. Here the run from the point (-1,0) to the y-axis is 1 and the rise is how much you went up after one step.. which is the slope. The y intercept IS the slope here. So we can rewrite the equation as y=sx+s and factor out the m to get y=s(x+1) To your point about the negative values, they still work here as plugging in negative slopes will make this work as well.
@kidzbop38isstraightfire92 Жыл бұрын
@@hvok99 yep of course, that makes sense now. I knew I was missing something simple. Thanks for explaining it well bro!
@kidzbop38isstraightfire924 жыл бұрын
10:24 sorry for the stupid question, but why is the slope equation y = s(x + 1) ? I thought y = mx + b....how did we determine that the slope (s) is the y-intercept (b)?
@ikavodo4 жыл бұрын
This a specific linear equation for a line with slope s passing through the point (-1,0). We have s= (y - y0)/ (x - x0), so simply plug in P's coordinates to get y = s(x + 1)
@TheMartian113 жыл бұрын
Well, in Europe and America usually only the y-intercept form is only taught, which is y=mx+c, where c is the y-intercept. there's actually another form you can derive using the x-intercept instead, which is y=m(x-d) where d is the x-intercept. the guy said m=s and d=-1 hence, y=s(x+1)
@MK-133373 жыл бұрын
Starting from (-1,0) the slope is just rise/run. So when you go an unit length in x (from -1 to 0) you go up (or down) a length equal to the slope. So your coordinates after a unit step in the x direction will be (0,s) giving you the y intercept as s.
@kidzbop38isstraightfire923 жыл бұрын
Thanks everyone for the help! After reading your replies, I realize how elementary this was 🤦♂️
@danlds17 Жыл бұрын
Another stupid question: Why didn't you start with a more general 2-variable cubic (which includes y^3) ? Excellent talk !
@darylcooper60904 жыл бұрын
Wonderful lecture !
@kamilziemian9953 жыл бұрын
Clear, interesting lecture that is pleasure to hear.
@kamilziemian9953 жыл бұрын
Excuse me, in the description in the title of third lecture (this lecture) is "Birch--Swinnerton-Dyer". I believe that is a type and it should be "Birch-Swinnerton-Dyer", with one "-" removed.
@Darrida11 ай бұрын
Sir Peter Swinnerton-Dyer is English baronet.
@kamilziemian99511 ай бұрын
@@Darrida Thank you for pointing it to me.
@sunshine41643 жыл бұрын
His silence speaks more than his words. How is he at computers ?
@madvoice37033 жыл бұрын
THE RIGHT STATEMENT IS BEABLE PRIZE
@indranilbiswas6293 жыл бұрын
Nice ❤️
@dr.rahulgupta75734 жыл бұрын
अद्भुत अति अद्भुत ।डा राहुल ।
@fabiangn8022 Жыл бұрын
Gracias por compartir
@grimaffiliations36713 жыл бұрын
No idea what I’m doing here, don’t even know my fractions
@christopherc1686 ай бұрын
You can learn, keep asking stupid questions , fail and fuck up till you dont , wisdom comes from experience, experience comes from good and bad judgement, the path to knowing and understanding is endless.
@thdgus7895 Жыл бұрын
La démonstration de π(1-ap/P)? Soit la serie Fp(k)=1/2^k+1/3^k + 1/5^k''''''''' vers l infini la série des premiers quelques soit k de N π(1-1/p^k)=1-Fp(k)+la somme de 1 vers l infini de 1/p^n×fp(P+n) et la somme de 1/p^n×fp(P+n)=1/2fp(k)^2 - 1/2 Fp(2k) d ou π(1-1/p^k)=1-fp(k) +1/2fp(k)^2 -1/2fp(2k) quelques que soit k dans N il y a cette égalité ' on peut vérifier π(1-1/p^k)=e^lnπ(1-1/p^k)=e^-fp(k)-@ le symbole @ le Epsilons donc π(1-1/p^k)=e^-fp(k)-@=1-fp(k)+1/2fp(k)^2 -1/2fp(2k) quelques soit k dans N pour le produit π(1-ap/p)=1/Le(1)=e^lnπ(1-ap/p)=e^-Lp(1)-@ d ou Lp(1)= lnLE(1)/e^@ d ou π(1-ap/p)=1/2(Lp(1)-1)^2 +1/2(1-Lp(2))=t(ln(Le(1))^2 l égalité π(1-1/p^k) =1-fp(k)+1/2fp(k)^2+1/2fp(2k)=e^-fp(k)-@ est valable quelque soit k appartient à N
@LolIGuess1233 жыл бұрын
I think the mic used in the seminar is too close to the mouth, lots of lip smacking and breathing distracts from the talking. Maybe run an EQ over the audio and filter the high frequencies
@wtpollard3 жыл бұрын
Not a helpful comment. Do you really think the people who organized this lecture are reading these KZbin comments?
@famousrapper85612 жыл бұрын
I love lipsmacking
@poodook6 ай бұрын
@@wtpollardwas your comment any more helpful?
@success_habbit4693 жыл бұрын
i am not kidding. this problem is going to be solved in upcoming 2 years.project is on progress. believe me