It's nearly my bedtime when I saw this, about half an hour after release
@sigmaswan29694 жыл бұрын
Good evening
@muktisubhiantara37374 жыл бұрын
i'm from indonesia, now in indonesia is night
@bhaskarpandey85864 жыл бұрын
@@the-hustle-guy His ❤ is his ❤ none of your ❤. Find your own gf
@anishjha89194 жыл бұрын
4:46, oh I love that look of a Mathematician.
@adrianarnaezsanchez44274 жыл бұрын
I just saw this today in university. Thanks, you are the best man!!!
@trueriver19504 жыл бұрын
Here's a note on where matrices can take you, once you get used to using the subscript notation rather than writing them out in full. AB in general does not equal BA, or as mathematicians and physicists say matrix multiplication is "non commutative". But (AB)C always equals A(BC) (associative) And A(B+C) always equals AB + BC (distributive) In Quantum Mechanics the non commutativity combined with the other two properties makes matrix algebra very useful. The difference AB - BA in particular turns out to have important physical meaning, sometimes called the commutator, and that in turn means that in QM the important matrices are square (otherwise that difference is undefined) It is also important for matrices to be useful to QM that associativity and distributivity do work as for scalars. The slight oddity to the incoming physicist is that some QM matrices have an infinite number of rows and columns... you don't usually meet that possibility in a maths course on matrices. When writing the equations with subscripts is actually no harder than a 2x2, just don't get stressed by the fact that you are covering infinities of elements. And if that feels strange for now, maybe come back to it later when you have had more experience with sensible sized matrices! Hint: don't try to write the elements out in full though...
@AndyoutoooBrutus Жыл бұрын
Heyyy are u math teacher??
@muhammadadrian47764 жыл бұрын
This came at the right time tq mr blackpenredpen !!!!!
@jacobjohnferrerjr.13064 жыл бұрын
Thank You very much! I want this in my subject in linear Algebra in early 9th grade.🙏😱
@TaraKulshrestha9 ай бұрын
This was so helpful and well-explained, thank you so much!
@nikhilpathania51084 жыл бұрын
You r best 👍👍👍 maths teacher. And i want to be like u 😍😍😋 lots of love from india 🇮🇳🇮🇳
@lipezinho7772Ай бұрын
very good teatcher!!!
@shivanshkumar35510 ай бұрын
Love from India ❤❤
@neilgerace3554 жыл бұрын
4:46 In general, AT.BT does not exist because the dimensions are incompatible. AT is n x m and BT is p x n. Is that correct?
@Apollorion4 жыл бұрын
'Only' when p is unequal to m.
@SimoneCasciaro544 жыл бұрын
Exactly. If m=p AT*BT may exist but it would be still different from BT*AT
@johnny_eth4 жыл бұрын
(AB)^T=B^T*A^T
@dvnsyaswanth99364 жыл бұрын
If both the matrices are square matrices of same order , then it is possible to apply the property
@trueriver19504 жыл бұрын
@@SimoneCasciaro54 Not usually equal. There is nothing to stop a special case where they do happen to be equal.
@yatogami73934 жыл бұрын
Just started transposition today .....And this will act as revision xd . Btw my man has grown a beard!!!
@nekothecat3 жыл бұрын
Can I just prove property 4 by doing this? As dimension of A is m×n and n×p for B. Hence the dimension of the product should be m×p For (AB)^T, the dimension of their product should be p×m this time and the only way to get this, is p×n matrix times n×m martix, which are B^T times A^T
@dognip4 жыл бұрын
I am excited because in this year I learn matrices and limits
@spicyramen01739 Жыл бұрын
thank you so much you saved me
@Visputescooking4 жыл бұрын
He is Mathbulious!!! 🔥🔥
@Grassmpl4 жыл бұрын
So easy. Can do it over any field. Or even a ring, where a matrix is invertible iff its det is a unit.
@ClahiCwahaab3 ай бұрын
Thanks bro🎉❤
@cjnenin893 жыл бұрын
nice job
@holyshit922 Жыл бұрын
1 and 4 properties are nearly the same for matrix inverse (but for matrix inverse we must have square and non singular matrices)
@JerryTran-q2o3 ай бұрын
hi can I ask for property #3 why (kA)^T = k(A)^T but not K^T (A)^T
@rateeshk81754 жыл бұрын
Morning Steve ☀
@EricBrunoTV3 жыл бұрын
Hi why is the utility of finding Transpose of a Matrix? Thank you
@drpeyam4 жыл бұрын
No dual spaces? 😭😭😭
@blackpenredpen4 жыл бұрын
I don’t even have a space in the first place
@georgebakradze32024 жыл бұрын
Can you do some fuctional equations after linear algebra rush.
@motherflerkentannhauser81524 жыл бұрын
If a matrix represents a linear mapping, then what mapping does its transpose represent?
@drpeyam4 жыл бұрын
Check out my dual space playlist for an answer to this ;)
@prabhatsharma57514 жыл бұрын
Love form Nepal❤
@AshrafAli-qn3gb4 жыл бұрын
😄👍
@silendil4 жыл бұрын
I have a question. Using properties 2 and 3 transposition is linear operator. My question- what the matrix of this operator?
@trueriver19504 жыл бұрын
It is a question worth asking. It turns out that it is fairly straightforward to show that the transpose operation is not capable of being performed by matrix multiplication. The formal way is by reductio ad absurdam. The crafty and unofficial way is to notice that mathematicians are usually rather parsimonious with notation. They probably would not have invented a specific transpose operator if it could be reduced to a matrix and a multiplication. But let's do the proof property Consider the two by two matrix ( a, b ) ( c, d ) Assume that there exists a matrix T that when it premultiplies A gives the transpose of A. Let T= ( p, q ) ( r, s ) The top left element of the transpose is just a. That means that for any a,c we have (p,q).(a,c) = a. ((Notice here I am using a dot product. You can imagine i am writing the second vector as a column if you prefer -- I am just mixing notations because of the restrictions that Y-T comments impose)) Clearly (p, q) = ( 1, 0 ) Likewise consider the bottom right: for that corner to work out we end up with ( r, s ) = ( 0, 1) Reassembling T we find that we have the identity matrix. That clearly is not the T we set out to find. That's the first contradiction. Had we tried the other two corners we would have found a matrix ( 0, 1 ) ( 1, 0 ) so we have found contradictory values for each of the four elements of T. The logic is impeccable, and can be done for any size matrix, so our assumption that any T exists must be false. A corollary of this result is that not all linear transformations can be expressed by matrix multiplication (at least under the definition you are using for a linear transformation) This is despite the fact that a matrix multiplication always gives a linear transformation. The relationship is not reflexive.
@domanicmarcus2176 Жыл бұрын
Hello sir, but I think that at 0:24, you said 2X4 matrix, but you wrote down a 4X2 Matrx which was transposed to a 4X2. I think you were thinking of the transposed, not the original.
@अरुण-ड6र4 ай бұрын
dude wtf 😂
@srivatsav98174 жыл бұрын
Good night bruh ..... We from india... Waiting for your post
@husseinelsayed80104 жыл бұрын
You are the best teacher
@lukedevlin454 жыл бұрын
where did 7:03 come from?
@johnny_eth4 жыл бұрын
Could you define a partial transpose operation P(n) such that A^P(0)=A, A^P(1)=A^T, A^P(2)=A, and A^P(1/2)^P(1/2)=A^T? What would A^P(1/2) look like? I kind of expect it to require something like imaginary matrices, kind like how complex numbers provide continuous behavior between positive and negative numbers.
@Grilnid4 жыл бұрын
I dont think it is possible to express transposition as a combination of matrices you could multiply your matrix A by. The transpose function is linear but from Mnp ->Mnp, so if you wanted to express that as a matrix you would have to define a matrix T which would have a size of n*p by n*p and and have it act on vectors of length n*p which would then represent your n by p matrices. With that in mind I don't doubt for a second that someone somewhere tried to figure out half-transposition lmao
@Grilnid4 жыл бұрын
Oh woops just noticed that you werent actually multiplying P and A together my bad pal, point still stands though
@johnny_eth4 жыл бұрын
@@Grilnid regarding matrix dimensions, perhaps it could be first extended to a square matrix using rows and columns from an identity matrix.
@Grilnid4 жыл бұрын
Yeah so I tried something on paper and you could express transposition as a fourth-order tensor acting on matrices (aka second-order tensors) but honestly if we're delving into tensor territory I'm just way out of my depth lmao
@toaj8684 жыл бұрын
Are properties 2 and 3 because matrix addition and scalar multiplication point-wise?
@trueriver19504 жыл бұрын
Yes. And similarly multiplication is different because it's more complicated than pointwise
@toaj8684 жыл бұрын
@@trueriver1950 But it's still a neat expression because it is row to column. Kind of like the transpose operator itself.
@toaj8684 жыл бұрын
Is the condition of having the appropriate dimensions the only reason matrix multiplication is not commutative?
@trueriver19504 жыл бұрын
Did you mean commutative? AB is not generally equal to BA (non commutative), though there are special cases where that holds "by coincidence".
@toaj8684 жыл бұрын
@@trueriver1950 Oh yeah sorry I'll edit it.
@Jared78734 жыл бұрын
Why do you not add sung outro anymore? 🎶Black pen red pen...
@achrafbelhadaoui50354 жыл бұрын
finally algebra seRIES!!!!!!
@johndavecusi69904 жыл бұрын
(1-x^2)y'=1-xy-3x^2+2x^4 can u solve this equation
@ranjitsarkar31264 жыл бұрын
When you multiply matrices ...it's weird.' ---blackpenredpen
@tiborgrun69634 жыл бұрын
Can you solve (AB)^T = A^T B^T for A and B?
@blackpenredpen4 жыл бұрын
If A and b commute.
@Pkaysantana2 жыл бұрын
@@blackpenredpen What do you mean by commute?
@VishalKumar-lk1pt2 жыл бұрын
@@Pkaysantana AB = BA
@alejrandom65923 жыл бұрын
4:47 serious mode on
@adityadhar13584 жыл бұрын
"It's kinda wierd because when you multiply matrices, it's wierd"
@52.yusrilihsanadinatanegar794 жыл бұрын
Cool!
@noname-gd9gk4 жыл бұрын
I got a test with an integration question, integrate the function ax²+bc+c. Everything was well and good and I got ax³/3+bx²/2+cx+constant. *BUT* They gave one option as ax³/3+bx²/2+cx+c (i.e; instead of constant they wrote c). But isn't that wrong. Because they have chosen a variable c for constant which is already present in the equation. I lost totally 5 marks due to this..
@yashsinghal10234 жыл бұрын
Wow that was unfortunate... this is exactly the reason why I have trust issues with mcq , like there would be error something like this and I would constantly think was it intentional or didn't caught examiner eye
@noname-gd9gk4 жыл бұрын
@@yashsinghal1023 Everyone in my class blindly used formula and got full marks and the teacher who teaches also blindly uses formula. It seems only I got the answer wrong.
@chinni66133 жыл бұрын
Marks doesn't equals to knowledge right!!
@noname-gd9gk3 жыл бұрын
@@chinni6613 but my knowledge is tested only using marks.
@anthonyyan35494 жыл бұрын
回憶在中學時的課程
@qwertyuiop59754 жыл бұрын
🔥💖LOVE FROM INDIA 💖⚡💖
@qwertyuiop59754 жыл бұрын
🧡💙💚
@ilickcatnip3 жыл бұрын
9:12 , your 'not a box' still looks more box than my boxes °Π°
@dragojakimovski60184 жыл бұрын
Can you solve algebra problems
@ed.6593 ай бұрын
4:45 "you paying attention right?"
@weekipi58134 жыл бұрын
already knew that.
@tomatrix75254 жыл бұрын
3:19 me with everything
@JSSTyger4 жыл бұрын
I learned to hate Linear Algebra quite immensely in my younger days.
@omshandilya88884 жыл бұрын
2020 raise to the power 2019 - 2020 divided by 2020 square + 2021=N then find the sum of digits of n bro plz solve this?? trying from last 5 weeks
@tonyhaddad13944 жыл бұрын
Pleaz can you write your question in order and use ( )
@omshandilya88884 жыл бұрын
Tony Haddad when (2020^2019 - 2020) is divided by (2020^2 + 2021) then we get the remainder as N now you have to find sum of digits of the N Understood??
@omshandilya88884 жыл бұрын
Tony Haddad Answer is proper numeric
@tonyhaddad13944 жыл бұрын
@@omshandilya8888 thank u man
@tonyhaddad13944 жыл бұрын
@@omshandilya8888 i will try my best
@MrBlonde584 жыл бұрын
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symplectic_matrix not directly a transpose property but maybe you can explain in a future episode 😁
@jofx40514 жыл бұрын
Matrix Transpose: Rows become columns and columns become rows
Why does it bother me so much you chose a 9 instead of an 8 here 0:30🤣
@bhaskarpandey85864 жыл бұрын
I thought this video be about commutative matrices
@revoltoff4 жыл бұрын
Dear blackpen redpen: Can you do a 1 hour CRASH course of elementary functions such as z(x,y)= e^xy2ln+ln(3y+x) find the derivative of that, and stuff like Change of X and change of Y gives this and this, how to work with the definition of the derivative. And stuff like Quick tips for basic optimizations, some basic integral rules and ways to do it, just an overall guide for math noobs
@sudo-logic4 жыл бұрын
What's up with the beard lmao 😂
@Sednas4 ай бұрын
Confucius
@gurindersinghkiom14 жыл бұрын
How to find the square root of matrix
@drpeyam4 жыл бұрын
I’ve done that on my channel
@gurindersinghkiom14 жыл бұрын
@@drpeyam thanks
@channelbuattv Жыл бұрын
The transpose of 8 is infinity 😅
@chessematics4 жыл бұрын
Want a bprp best moments episode
@junielamadayag19463 жыл бұрын
oh the pokemon ball is his mic.......
@zeroregretsgiven4 жыл бұрын
This is so trivial.
@Mau-ME4 жыл бұрын
Lo único que entendí fue pokeball.
@Visputescooking4 жыл бұрын
We, the people of the world would like you to see with the full-touch chalk. 🔥Will you?🔥
@Visputescooking4 жыл бұрын
Yes I would too!
@BharatGhantala9 ай бұрын
Indian teachers are best...😊😊not foreign
@wesleysuen41404 жыл бұрын
u always hold something cute in your left hand... does it really help keeping people’s eyes on the screen?
@MrConverse4 жыл бұрын
Wesley Suen, it’s his microphone... and his trademark.
@trueriver19504 жыл бұрын
It always used to be a black sphere that (in my opinion) wasn't that cute. I used to wonder if it had remote controls for the video camera on it. Then one day his gf gave him a cute toy to use as a mic holder, and since then he has varied then from time to time. It's become his second trademark, his principal trademark being the way he swaps between two colours without putting either pen down.
@markzebian1234 ай бұрын
Why is he always holding a pokeball???
@Lumina17294 жыл бұрын
First
@nikhilpathania51084 жыл бұрын
Pokemon ball?? 🙁
@tanmaysinghal33874 жыл бұрын
U look weird in that beard
@blackpenredpen4 жыл бұрын
Nah
@tanmaysinghal33874 жыл бұрын
@@blackpenredpen ohhk
@اقاتࢦࢦوحديہِٰ2 жыл бұрын
❤️
@omshandilya88884 жыл бұрын
2020 raise to the power 2019 - 2020 divided by 2020 square + 2021=N then find the sum of digits of n bro plz solve this?? trying from last 5 weeks
@hamiltonianpathondodecahed52364 жыл бұрын
(2020²⁰¹⁹ - 2020) / ( 2020² + 2020 + 1) x = 2020 x(x²⁰¹⁸ - 1) /( x² + x + 1) = x(x - 1)( x²⁰¹⁸-1) / ( x³ - 1) Try using generating functions : ) btw N is not an integer ig ಠ_ಠ, it leaves 4080402{in a previous version I had put 2019 here by mistake} as a remainder so doesn't make much sense to talk about sum of digits Actually polynomial reduction also works well
@omshandilya88884 жыл бұрын
Hamiltonian Path on dodecahedron I am really grateful that you spend time in answering but can you plz tell ahead as I just watched a video on generating function and as told by him generating function is sum of a series and now i am not able to relate it to this Q pleases guide
@omshandilya88884 жыл бұрын
ya actually we need to find sum of the digis of remainder of that division
@hamiltonianpathondodecahed52364 жыл бұрын
@OMS PLAYER oh , for remainder , you should try polynomial reduction, ELABORATE METHOD: consider the eqn (x^2019 - x) = Q(x) (x^2 + x + 1) + R(x) Observe that R(x) would be linear , hence x^2019 - x = Q(x) (x^2 + x + 1) + ax + b substitute x = cbrt(1) = omega (I will represent it as w) and omega ^2 so the eqn becomes w^2019 - w = Q(w)( 0 ) + a w + b - - - - - (1) similarly w^4038 - w^2 = a w^2 + b - - - - - - - (2) (1) can be written as 1 - w = aw + b and (2) as 1 - w^2 = a w^2 + b Solving gives a = -1, b = 1 Hence x^2019 - x = Q(x) (x^2+x+1) + 1-x replacing x = 2020 , we get 2020^2019 - 2020 = Q(2020)(2020^2 + 2020 + 1) - 2019 Now adding 2020^2 + 2020 + 1 to -2019 gives the required remainder = 2020^2 + 2 = 4080402 Shortcut Method avoiding complex numbers a bit we 'll again use remainder theorem but in a cleverer way in the previous method we basically substituted x such that divisor becomes 0 ie (x^2 + x + 1) = 0 => (x^3 = 1) hence in a vague sense(actually modulo x^2 + x +1) x ^ 2019 = (x^3)^k = 1 x^2019 - x = 1 -x now the previous method follows
@hamiltonianpathondodecahed52364 жыл бұрын
@@omshandilya8888 You may ask if there are any queries regarding the solution