QI Compilation | Best Of Maths Magic

[@India.H]

"Shut up, Debbie McGee." "Stop saying no at me in German." Aww this is why I love Aisling.

[@justusbraz]

That's Numberwang!

[@scottlampe70]

Nice.

[@Thishandleisavailabl.e]

Yess haha

[@Milk27]

I choked on my toothbrush

[@shadow_sprite1006]

Thats Wanganumb

[@79pants]

361!

[@distantcoff7391]

Susan losing it is adorable, well I mean, Susan being even more adorable

[@slowfreq]

It's often used as trivia that the Principia Mathematica took hundreds of pages to prove that 1+1=2. This is incorrect; while the proof does appear hundreds of pages into the book, the proof is contained in what you see on the screen, even though it does contain references to previous parts of the book. Such a fake fact would be similar to saying that the dictionary takes hundreds of pages to define what a zebra is.

[@EneriGiilaan]

Indeed. But - as you said - it does require *some* of the earlier material. So while not taking hundreds of pages it is not a one page job either. I have never even tried to check this myself - but many years ago someone that supposedly knew what he was talking about - told me that it would still take some tens of pages (if my memory serves).

[@LemonJamulus]

You can still use as trivia that there are hundreds of pages worth of maths that are more fundamental than 1+1=2 though.

[@DerpMuse]

Thats not true though. I can write the sentence as A + B = C while A is the sum of 100 pages, and B is another 100 pages. Just because someone can simplify an equation to a single page, doesn't mean that the 200 pages aren't needed. The single page of logic is useless without the 200 pages of axioms needed. Thats like saying E=mc² is the just one simple line to explain mass-energy equivalence without noting its a simplified version of E²=(mc²)²+(pc)² in which that is expanded even more to include M = μ + E0/c2 & a frame relevant M_rel = E/c2 without 10,000 pages of priors, mass-energy equivalance being written as a single line would not be possible. Math is just descriptive. Its not like someone plucked a platonic E=mc² measurement from space. Theres too many armchair commenters thinking they have a grasp on things because they have listened to a science communicator tell them a story. [BRA | KET] and Psi are alien concepts to you and QED. Its easy to describe the path a ball takes rolling downhill. but to understand a geodesic path in curved spacetime that can loop infinitely while never changing it's vector, shows gravitation is a pseudo force, and a force should change a path according to newtonian mechanics, but gravity isnt actually a force, it doesnt change your path, it changes the road youre traveling on (3space). You can travel straight down a straight road, and you can also travel straight down a road that curves. you wouldnt know the difference without relativity, a 2nd observer to show the pathis different for each person and the combination of both perspectives leaving the difference to be the true path. Same thing happens with path integrals and the path of least action to form the arrow of time. Its easy to tell when someone parrots science communicators vs someone who took the courses to actually understand it.

[@lezzman]

All very well, however I think anyone who needs a book to explain that one plus one equals two is going to struggle with some of the most fundamental problems of the world.

[@conormurphy4328]

Justin James Houman congratulations, you may have just typed the most boring comment in the history of youtube.

[@GabrielKnightz]

"NINE NIIINE NIIINE" that was just hilarious.

[@pedge66]

Reminds me of my German girlfriend, she liked to rate our sex, one time I decided to try an@l...my best score ever 😁

[@jackbadley4890]

Intergral v squared dv From one to the cube root of three Times the cosine Of three pi over nine Is the log of the cube root of e

[@zyaicob]

Why'd you change it from t?

[@marycanary86]

i love how susan starts laughing in absolute fear when stephen begins reciting the limerick xD

[@LarsCT]

Take 3 random digits (the first and third can't be the same) and forma a 3 digit number from them, also form the reverse number then subtract the smaller from the larger. So we get "abc"-"cba", where a>c; let n=a-c -> n is between 1 and 9 (thus a digit) The difference is (100a+10b+c) - (100c+10b+a) = 100(a-c)+10(b-b)+(c-a) = 100n+0+(-1)(a-c) = 100n-n (this is why the first and third digit can't be the same) Now to get the digits of this difference we do the following 100n-n = 100n -100 + 100 - n = 100(n-1) +90 + (10-n) The first digit is (n-1), the second is 9, the last is (10-n) Now we can add that to its reverse number 100(n-1) +90 + (10-n) + 100(10-n) +90 + (n-1) = 100(n-1+10-n) + 10(9+9) + (10-n+n-1) = 900 + 180 + 9 = 1089 Bamm! French.

[@lancer525]

And this is why normal people hate maths...

[@nadinewesterveld5597]

I love these kinds of proofs! Also, I'm glad she didn't ask for the 89th word on page 10... it could have taken much longer

[@andywright8803]

@@nadinewesterveld5597 I was thinking that book surely doesn't have 1089 pages

[@peterd616]

Well, you still have to account for the variable of whether or not Noel Fielding will be able to count to 10

[@AtticusDragon]

Sweet, I was hoping someone would do that thank you.

[@puirYorick]

Nine. Nine! Nine!!!! It's no good you shouting at me in German!

[@jamesbutler6253]

She said "stop shouting no at me in German"

[@samharper5881]

THIS IS ONE OF THOSE GREAT TIMES WHEN I CAN TURN OFF THE VIDEO AND READ SOMEONE'S COMMENT INSTEAD OF LISTENING TO THE COMEDIAN MAKE THE JOKE

[@b__c7538]

@@samharper5881 but why?

[@itumelengmasemola717]

@@b__c7538 lmao

[@JoeBleasdaleReal]

Alan's face hitting the board at 7:02 😂😂😂😂

[@TanjoGalbi]

Age old slapstick comedy, always pleases the simple minded :P

[@h4724-q6j]

@@TanjoGalbi do you have to be a dick?

[@gothic2fans233]

​@@TanjoGalbi Some of the most classic comedies like Mr Bean or films made by Charlie Chaplin are slapstick, and were made by very inteligent people, so I don't think it's fair to consider that solely for "the simple minded".

[@Ranger1812]

@@TanjoGalbi Slapstick's hilarious. It takes a lack of intelligence to insult someone for liking that.

[@juninplays8742]

Didn't your parents tell you not to feed the trolls? Way to get played boys.

[@padstowphantom]

Gotta love Aisling. She's an absolute crack up.

[@ClaudeSac]

If only she had an ass...

[@dilloncox1384]

@@ClaudeSac if only you could judge her by her personality and not be disappointed that a comedian you'll never meet "doesnt have an ass"

[@jimmywoldul7546]

@@dilloncox1384 He's referencing the Carol Vorderman imitation you idiot.

[@samdherring]

How are they an idiot for not catching a reference to a bloody impression of someone else? This is why references are rarely funny.

[@faizalkhan3042]

For your info, it's always 1089. Doesn't matter what 3 digit number you chose, except for all of the 3 numbers being same.

[@Samld1200]

Palindromic numbers don’t work

[@michaels4340]

Got a bit unlucky with the original difference being 99 rather than a three-digit number, though!

[@JimC]

2:14 The multiples are not just anagrams. They're "cyclic", as she said a few seconds earlier. Write the original digits in a circle, then the multiples can be read starting at different digits in the circle. This works because 1/7 = .142857142857142857... Maybe Sandy mentioned all of that after this clip.

[@andymcl92]

"This works because..." doesn't actually explain why that makes it work. It's a bit like me asking how a car moves and you saying "Because you put hydrocarbons in to it." I think it's numberphile that have a really good video about it :)

[@JimC]

@@andymcl92 And you don't explain it, either. And you don't even give a link to the video. Thanks for the help!

[@andymcl92]

@@JimC Well at the time I was a bit busy and thought anyone who cared would be able to search KZbin themselves for the two words "numberphile" and "cyclic" and click on the first video. But if that's too tricky, here you go! :) kzbin.info/www/bejne/jYbPkoiXocyrp6s

[@paulthoresen8241]

I figured this out in maths one day instead of paying attention, very trippy. Also: 14 = 7*2 42= 7*6 28 =7*4 85 = 7(2*6)+1 57 = 7*(2*4)+1 71 = 7*(6+4)+1 42-14 = 28 85-71= 14 71-57= 14 85-57= 28...etc 1+4+2+8+5+7+1 = 28

[@RobRidleyLive]

@@andymcl92 Always a mistake to imagine anyone on KZbin can do anything for themselves. Hence the creation of "let me google that for you" I'm sure you can find the link yourse...oh bugger.

[@amyshaw893]

just so everyone is aware, its always going to be 1089

[@efari]

not always. if the audience chose 3 times the same number, like 222 or 333, etc... it's always 0 equally if it's a number like 242 or 525 etc... it's gonna be 0

[@TimSheehan]

@@efari the 'magician' will say it has to be ANOTHER number, not one that has already been selected

[@Roman-hg6rg]

I did not know any of these 3 things. Awesome :D Thanks QI commenters.

[@efari]

@@TimSheehan good thinking

[@Crazyasianman286]

I’ve found that it doesn’t work when the first number and the reverse of it equal a negative number

[@elliotttalksf1825]

I love maths but at 1:44 I totally agreed with Sandi 😂

[@johnyesjustjohn]

6:34 Oddly enough, Aislynn would go on to portray Rachel Riley on 8 Out Of 10 Cats Does Countdown. EDIT: I meant Aisling! I blame everyone named Aislynn for my blunder!

[@distantcoff7391]

@Just John Oddly enough tho ewe couldn't be bothered show Aisling the respect of spelling her name correctly CLarseACT.

[@ConstantChaos1]

0:40 that laugh is what keeps me coming back

[@CM-hg8nl]

At 5:21 there is a missing set inclusion symbol in the Russell's theorem. It's on p.379 of Volume I of the Principia if anyone is curious. They have: ⊢:. α, β ∊ 1. ⊃: α β = Λ . ≡ . α ∪ β ∊ 2 It should read: ⊢:. α, β ∊ 1. ⊃: α ∩ β = Λ . ≡ . α ∪ β ∊ 2 In modern notation: ⊢ (α, β ∊ 1) ⊃ [ (α ∩ β = ∅ ) ≡ ( α ∪ β ∊ 2 )] Which states that if α and β are discrete unitary sets the intersection (the members of the sets α and β they have in common) of α and β is the empty set if and only if α and β's union is a member of the set of duals (the set of sets that have two discrete items).

[@bradleynoneofyourbizz5341]

And here I was scrolling down to see if anyone else noticed that, too!

[@Stu_Yorkie]

Yes of course. It was so obvious 😬😧😂😂😂

[@ShadowGaro]

🤓

[@EdgyShooter]

Sandi choosing people from the audience shows she's secretly planning to take over every show, as she's clearly ready for question time 😂

[@distantcoff7391]

@EdgyShooter As opposed to that dribbling idiot cunning the runt tree‽¿‽

[@tonymurphy2624]

Worth noting that Russell got three books into the Principia before Gödel came along and proved that Russell was tilting at windmills, by showing that it's impossible for any system of axioms to be consistent and complete, rendering the goal of a complete and consistent set of axioms for mathematics a fool's errand.

[@adamnevraumont4027]

Except incomplete and consistent still has value.

[@CM-hg8nl]

Not any system of axioms, Gödel just showed those of the complexity of the Principia (aka Peano arithmetic) are incomplete. There are weaker axiomitizations of arithmetic (e.g. Presburger arithmetic, and Skolem arithmetic) that are both complete and consistent. There are also weaker axiomitizations that are incomplete, i.e. Robinson arithmetic, which shows that it is not axiom schema of induction that is the cause of the incompleteness, but the ability to code Gödel numbers that is essential to show incompleteness.

[@GAGL.Evolution]

Susan always laughs when her brain frys❤❤❤

[@oscargr_]

Mitchell is a comedy genius. (6:20)

[@TanjoGalbi]

He shares the same sense of humour as me, angry logic. The difference between him and me is that he has self confidence and can perform his comedy in front of other people and has become a success. I lack any form of self confidence so I am a nobody. Oh well. Good on him :)

[@oscargr_]

@@TanjoGalbi That's not angry logic, that's self-pity. Evidently, i'm more sarcastic than funny.

[@TanjoGalbi]

@@oscargr_ He uses angry logic for his comedy, that's his style of humour. That is also my style. Though you are right that here I was using self pity humour but you should hear me when I am ranting about random things or things people say wrong ;)

[@chrisbrady2683]

@@TanjoGalbi The main difference between you and him is that he's actually funny...

[@TanjoGalbi]

@@jackevans1092 No idea why I was not alerted to your reply 4 weeks ago but why the hell are you correcting me on a word I did not use? xD

[@aidanhoward213]

The reason that 142,857 is an anagram of itself when multiplied by 1 through to 6 is because it is simply a higher version of the old "one over seven" idea. One divided by seven equals 0.142 857 142 857 recurring. Two divided by seven has the same numbers, but as 0.285 714 285 714 recurring. Likewise for 3, 4, 5 and 6 over seven. So the 142,857 of that problem is the same set of six numbers, producing the same results.

[@kathrynpitt4973]

QI has taught me so much over the years, more than every maths lesson combined.

[@NoisqueVoaProduction]

2:04 She went a little speedy with that one. The number doesn't seem so special, but maybe for a keen mathematician's eye, you can realize this is 1/7. (not exactly, obviously, but rather the repeating part of the decimal) 1/7=0,142857 142857 ... It has some other properties, but I can't recall. I usually remember it because it almost have the table of 7 within itself. Like Start with 14, then (repeating the 4)there is 42, 28, 85 (7 times 15), then almost 56... (yeah, the rules breaks, sorry) When I say that multiplied by 7 gives 999,999 I was sure that that was the number,

[@zyaicob]

85 isn't a multiple of 7.

[@NoisqueVoaProduction]

oh, yeah, you are right. I knew it broke somewhere, but I made that small mistake

[@ellademore1506]

Man. Weird thing to notice, but David Mitchell's voice has certainly aged with him. His high-pitched exasperated voice rarely comes out these days.

[@justinsmith4562]

Yes its called aging.

[@DlcEnergy]

8:39 "Nine! Nine! Nine!" "Stop saying no to me in German" Alternative: "This ain't the time for your Adolph impressions dear"

[@JokeDeity2]

2:42 That's numberwang!

[@davidbondy2250]

Anyone else pause at 0:20 just to see if that anagram was mathematically correct?

[@conormurphy4328]

No, there are better things to do in life.

[@AtticusDragon]

Lol totally.

[@Fete_Fatale]

"Pause"? It's simple mental arithmetic ... I did it in my head while watching. The top line adds up to 182 .. which was instantly recognisable as a multiple of 7 - I saw it as 140 + 42 ... (20*7)+(6*7) - others might see 91*2 or 210-28 ... then 26+55 ... it's always going to be 81=9² ... or -9² :P The only issue with it is that there are two possible solutions for √4, but I guessed that QI (or the creator of the limerick) wasn't geeky enough to consider that.

[@siddheshgooptu]

"Do I have to slap you?" Dead XD

[@PianoKwanMan]

I am reminded of Chansey happy slapping Meowth

[@OriginalPiMan]

I recall that it made more sense in the context of the episode. I think it was to be the treatment for a 19th century alleged ailment suffered by women.

[@JimC]

@@OriginalPiMan Ah. Thanks!

[@girshin]

I wish he would’ve she was be genuinely annoying

[@ConstantChaos1]

I love that laugh, it's the laugh of someone who is suffering a total mental break

[@andywright8803]

It's still amazing to me how some intelligent people (talking here about Susan Calman, who is a lawyer, and very clever) can have such an aversion to maths, that even reciting a math based limerick reduces them to giggling heaps

[@joethompson4223]

My dad is an accountant, and one of his favourite sayings is “show me a lawyer, and I’ll show you a maths error”

[@CMOT101]

Bet you are fun at parties

[@MLaurenceWatson]

I went to law school, not math school

[@qualifiedidiots2165]

She's sat there thinking, "I'll be having that chair mr Fry."

[@annonimooseq1246]

I both failed second grade math and took and mostly understood a class on set theory while in seventh. I’m just glad I’m not alone.

[@brain_apostrophe_t]

lol the massive 8 and the crosseyed look of pride. fuckin love ashling

[@anodosarcade7355]

If you thinks your nervous doing math on front of the class, imagine in front of an audience and TV

[@ollieb9875]

If you think *you're* nervous...

[@DenerWitt]

it helps if you dont suck at it

[@Milk27]

I suck at basic maths now. I havent done maths in years and i never practice it. I should work on it 🤔

[@yamanmustafa7574]

*You're

[@Taricus]

To get my physics degree, one of the things I had to do was teach a topic and do a 20 minute presentation where I derived how to do something. They do it for that very reason, because math gets harder the closer you get to the board in front of an audience LOL!

[@orp0piru]

(2:18) after 7x, the pattern holds, but with a twist: 8 x 142857 = 1142856; 1+142856 = 142857 14 x 142857 = 1999998; 1+999998 = 999999 15 x 142857 = 2142855; 2+142855 = 142857 21 x 142857 = 2999997; 2+999998 = 999999 22 x 142857 = 3142854; 3+142854 = 142857 : 272 x 142857 = 38857104; 38+857104 = 857142 : :

[@Ulkomaalainen]

Basically it is the periodic result you'll get if you divide 1/7. That will be 0.142847142857... (repeat 142857 ad infinitum). Which will result in 7/7=0.999999 (repeat 999999 ad infinitum). 0.9999999999... equals 1. So basically the "1" you're losing at the end by shortening the periodic number will be added to the part beofre the decimal point.

[@n200518]

*21 x 142857 = 2999997; 2+999997 = 999999

[@orp0piru]

@@n200518 Thanks for the correction, I got sloppy when copy-pasting from the 14x line. btw, the pattern holds for negative numbers too, just hold the minus in front and do the positive thing inside the parenthesis: -26 x 142857 = -(3714282); -(3 + 714282) = -714285

[@DrDespicable]

Normalizing the volume level would have been nice...

[@olliedylan1381]

DrDespicable 0:16 yESS

[@nathanberrigan9839]

1. Pick an integer between 1 and 1000 2. Multiply your number by 3 3. Add up the digits of the product (e.g. 69420 -> 6+9+4+2+0 = 21) 4. Multiply the sum by 6 5. Add up the digits of this product 6. Subtract 5 from the sum 7. Get the letter of the alphabet for the number (1 = A, 2 = B, 3 = C, etc) 8. Think of a country that begins with that letter 9. Think of an animal that begins with the last letter of the country 10. Think of a color that begins with the last letter of the animal There are no orange kangaroos in Denmark.

[@Pagliacci_Rex]

Love Ronny sticking up for Bertrand Russel.

[@ptrichie71]

The Mcnugget link always reminds me back in the day I ordered 18? Girl serving said we do 6, 9 or 20 you can't order 18! Cant I have two portions of 9 then?? 😆

[@NewMessage]

If only my teachers had tried teaching me with the Mc Maths method.

[@egeerdem8272]

every possible three digit number will give a multiple of 99 in the first step (unless its something like 101, 252, 686 etc.) the reverse of a multiple of 99 is going to be a multiple of 99 mirrored from the tenth number (99990, 198891, 297792, which is 99x199x10, 99x299x9, 99x399x8) so the addition of these two numbers will always be 99xn+99x(11-n) = 99x11 = 1089.

[@whalesnamedshark]

The white board thing was so funny

[@jordivermeulen2519]

What Russell did wasn't proving that 1+1=2. What he and Whitehead were trying to do, was define a set of axioms (things that are taken to be true without proof) and inference rules from which all mathematical truths could be deduced. This proof that 1+1=2 was merely showing that this is something that could be proven with their choice of axioms and inference rules. Gödel later showed that no set of axioms and inference rules can be sufficient to deduce all mathematical truths.

[@annoloki]

Aye... there comes a point where you have to define your terms... like proving what your own name is, it's a faulty concept, because you don't discover your own name, you decide it (or your parents do, but the point being, the meaning of the word is given, not found). So "two" is defined as being "one plus one" by the equals sign, so "1+1=2" is a statement that defines what the terms mean in relation to each other, there's no question mark, it's just like what I'm doing here... saying the exact same thing in multiple ways *lol*

[@conormurphy4328]

And nobody cared

[@dionlindsay2]

Thanks for giving Whitehead part credit. Re "wasn't proving 1 plus 1 equals two": correctimundo. And the incompleteness theorem is a beautiful thing :-)

[@JoeBleasdaleReal]

0:40 Susan Calman's laugh is so infectious 😂😂😂

[@zapkvr]

So is the plague

[@clushvortex1551]

Additionally, “twelve plus one” and “eleven plus two” both have thirteen letters! The same as their sum

[@57thorns]

If you acutally know some mahs, that mind reading trick (1089) is pretty obvious. The numbers you use are: 100a+10b+c and 100c+10b+a respectively. It is pretty obvious from the start that the initial subtraction removes the b from the equation. You next number is 99 (a-c) if we makes sure that a>c which we do by requesting the smaller number is subtracted from the larger number. If a=c the whole trick falls flat because the first sum is 0. :-) So I would _always_ repeat a digit if possible, just to see how the magician solves the issue. If b is equal to a or c it does not matter of course so one save is to sort the digits before the first subtraction. The number we get: xyz has some interesting properties: x = a-c-1 y = 9 (always) z= 10+a-c The last addition is xyz + zyx: 100x+10y+z + 100z + 10y + x = 100 (x+z) + 20 y + (x+z) But x+z is a-c-1 + c-a+10 so x+z is always 9, and we remove the last two variables from the expression. Ending up with 9* 121 = 1089.

[@bordercolliesarebeautiful5280]

12 +1=11+2 is not only an anagram when written in numbers but also if you write it out in letters as well.

[@JoelCarli]

I just realized I haven't manually subtracted anything in ages. I was a bit shocked to find out I couldn't remember what I'd learned in primary school.

[@NimjaIV]

I just had the same thing happen to me.

[@isabellaangeline2175]

How do you forget basic math?

[@Matthew-ut6ed]

It's actually easier to count up from the smaller number.

[@PyroOfZen]

​@@isabellaangeline2175 By not being able to remember it.

[@red-rage-1374]

9:19 Our maths class of 12-13 year olds were asked to figure out the formula, I was the only one to do it despite never having completed a maths test within the given time. Proving that speed and skill are not the same thing!

[@AnnaAnna-uc2ff]

Thanks.

[@Kaziklu]

A Irish Girl, a Scottish Girl and a Dane walk into a panel show. When English is combined with Arithmetic Giggles erupt at the sight of a Limerick Stephen will fake a Scottish slap and of course the crowd will clap At Susan's bemusement of this silly rhetoric (it's not great but I had to)

[@TanjoGalbi]

How a teacher might critique that:- Poor grammar: It should start with "An" not "A". Also girl is lower case G in both uses, limerick is lower case L and you are missing punctuation marks. Factual error: "Giggles at the sight of a limerick", she giggled when the limerick was read out so that should be "Giggled at the sound of a limerick". Plus it's technically an audience not a crowd but that one can be put down to artistic interpretation! :) And finally the limerick as a whole does not conform to the rhythm that defines a limerick. Nice try though :)

[@TanjoGalbi]

​@John M Is that directed at Rob or me? :)

[@Kaziklu]

@John M I'm a strange person and I wanted to see if I could.

[@Kaziklu]

@@TanjoGalbi yes my grammar sucks it was a quick thing I did in 5 minutes if I were handing it in for marks, decades ago, I might have fixed that in a second draft of such a silly thing. Crowd and audience have a difference syllable count or I would have used it. The Capitals is an odd quark I have that may have come from studying German when I was young I don't know. I tend to Capitalize words of importance or for emphasis (It is also a common sight in marketing and what is poetry and humour if not a form of marketing ;). Girl, Limerick. The limerick was of course visually shown. Sight is a correct usage as it was both shown and heard without the visual element the laughter would have been fairly muted I suspect. (Of course when you move as much as I did growing up you learn that grammar is taught at a different pace and in different orders in different school boards. As such I missed huge swaths of it and had to learn what I could later. As it doesn't interest me I have bad grammar. Though much better than it was.)

[@invisiblekid99]

I wouldn't mind being Alan at this point 8:24

[@LaGuerre19]

Truly, one of the great moments in QI history. A stance for the ages.

[@PointsofData]

I'm pretty sure McDonalds will sell you 43 mcnuggets if you insisted. The employees arent paid enough to care.

[@57thorns]

And they do it with a smile, no not really, it has to have become quite stale by now. I wonder how many poor mcd workers have gotten orders for 43 nugget by now?

[@IspamObjection]

The McNugget number (43) can actually be met since it is also possible to order 4 McNuggets on their own (Usually sold in happy meals), when using the 4 piece nuggets the highest number of McNuggets that it's impossible to order is now 11.

[@conner.j.a.wilson]

Well pointed out, but I think that the numbers were more hypothetical to illustrate a theory.

[@Vulcanwoman]

Numberphile did an entire episode about that phoenominon.

[@HaydenX]

@IspamObjection Is your profile pic R. Mika rule34?

[@WPPatriot]

That really depends on if you can buy them separately where you live. Where I live, you can't.

[@mygoogle7684]

Happy meals have 4 mcnuggets, 20+9+6+2 happy meals 🤷‍♂️

[@woodybarn66]

Twelve plus a hundred and forty-four Plus twenty plus three root four Divided by seven Plus five times eleven Equals the square of nine plus naught

[@dux2508]

Imaginative!

[@minners71]

@@dux2508 How so? He just wrote it down as it was.

[@OriginalPiMan]

@@minners71 Because it's an alternate phrasing of the limerick. If you mispronounce "nought"...

[@bordercolliesarebeautiful5280]

The last one doesn’t always work. The first and last numbers have to be consecutive like 7 and 8. It won’t work for a number like eg 249

[@mg-oe3qr]

Border Collies Are beautiful it still works with that number, 942 - 249 = 693, 693 + 396 = 1089.

[@Shakes-Off-Fear]

Susan’s laugh of panic was amazing 😂

[@munkymittens]

7:12 - "you know nothin' Jon snooww"

[@bucwhovian8305]

7:02 Alan did that to himself!

[@lightchipster]

5:23 - Came for the QI, stayed for the Mitchell rant

[@serisak]

any number divided by 7 that has a remainder, always has the same recurring pattern of digits. for example: 45/7=6.428571428571428571... 65456/7=9350.8571428571428571... 14.25/7=2.03571428571248571248571... 22/7=3.1428571428571...

[@davidguthary8147]

The integral sec y dy From zero to one sixth of pi Is log to base e Of the square root of three Times the sixty-fourth power of i.

[@GAGL.Evolution]

3:51 The question is WHY would anyone buy anything from mcverminburger?

[@Holthis]

It’s always gonna end up 1089 tho cuz any three digit number of unique digits minus its reverse will get a sum that when you subtract its reverse again you get 1089. You’d be screwed if they picked any palindromic number. Really woulda thrown a wrench in there

[@joelbacker10]

Would have been way funnier

[@dunebasher1971]

@@joelbacker10 Except Sandi wouldn't have let it happen, she'd simply have asked for a different number, same as any stage magician would.

[@elijahmasquelier1238]

Ok so maybe they borrow weird in Britain but what is she doing at 8:50? I’dve crossed out the 2 and put a 1, then borrow 1 from the 8 making it 11-2=9.

[@markc7440]

43 - next door to life the Ultimate Answer.

[@YYHoe]

"Altissimum planetam tergeminum observavi" refers to what Galileo thought that Saturn was in fact three planets orbiting together. The two "planets" on either side were its rings.

[@darrylwood2271]

43 nuggets is incorrect. 4 packs exist and the highest number you can't buy is now 11

[@GlidusFlowers]

She meant under the rules that she established, making it correct. Under the actual rules, it isn’t

[@oscargr_]

What is encouraging is that nobody suggested to buy 44 and just eat one. That would be just horrible.

[@22DOMINOES22]

@@oscargr_ An extra McNugget?! Don't be absurd!

[@dianeshelton9592]

But that’s 44, which isn’t 43😥

[@kallek919]

Maybe I get it all wrong (or have gaps in the understanding of the English language), but shouldn't it be “the lowest number you can’t buy”?

[@SaschaVIE]

You should add a link to the book in the description.

[@CaptHayfever]

The limerick also works without the bundle terms: "Twelve plus one-forty-four Plus twenty plus three square-root four,..." In the US, McNuggets are sold in multiples of 4, 6, 10, & 20; it's not possible to get *any* odd count. I recognize every single symbol in that symbolic logic proof & could read it to you. I cannot even begin to understand what that proof means, though, as it seems to contain nothing but citations of previous results, none of which I know because I haven't read Prinicipia Mathematica.

[@MrsRen]

They used to be sold in 9 counts. Just not anymore.

[@karstais]

Why is the first video interlaced?

[@jessicalee333]

Susan Calman is the cutest hobbit in the shire.

[@mrswinkyuk]

No, that giggly little girl routine is _really_ annoying.

[@jessicalee333]

@@zapkvr Maybe psychotherapy would help you. Feeling violent urges when you see a person having a good time is not healthy, well-adjusted, or sane. Help is out there, try looking for it.

[@zapkvr]

@@jessicalee333 I'm good thanks. I have these impulses. And I control them. Unlike other people. Dismissed

[@lsaria4977]

I had "12 plus its square plus a score" but it still works. Not convinced by the idiomatic terms though. I prefer "the integral d-squared dz, between 1 and the cube root of 3, times the cosine of 3 pi by nine is the log of the cube root of e".

[@hughtube5154]

Good, but it needs the American pronunciation of Z as "ZEE". In the UK it's "Zed".

[@lonnwy]

It's official I fancy Alan Davies, xxxx

[@MrPineappla]

1:45 Hahahahahha, ooh no whys that funny

[@ShayBabae]

Wait a minute!... Sandi is magic?!?!?! my life feels like a lie.... 😳😋

[@davidcraig9779]

1 + 1 + 2 is relative. In physics, 1 positive particle + 1 negative particle = 1 neutral particle.

[@2Cerealbox]

so then just 1+ (-1) = 0?

[@davidcraig9779]

@@2Cerealbox Yes, unless a + or - permeates another n or zero. In that case the 0 could contain a positive or negative charge too . Lately though I've been wondering if all the macro & micro of the Universe isn't binary. I haven't started checking that out yet. Any thoughts or opinions?

[@simonhurta4357]

Good stuff you should view my maths puzzle the ecuations I show are hmmm puzzling. Excellent work u guys 👍

[@whocareswho]

The last one, with the envelope. HOW?!?! I ALWAYS tear the envelope to shreds and ruin everything! I must know the secret!

[@kyrla]

As long as the number isn't three of the same digit (111, 222, etc), the answer will always be 1089 (or -1089 if the first number is smaller than its inverted form)

[@narayananmohan8114]

If they havent done an episode dedicated to Math, then they should get Rachel Riley on it.

[@dunebasher1971]

MathS. We're not American, thankyou.

[@CMOT101]

Maths*

[@jonathanwood8847]

I'm convinced this is the matrix. I literally *thought* about this episode earlier today, and now it's been recommended to me out of nowhere

[@mantistoboggan5171]

wogan obviously hasn't heardd the bertrand russell interview about how smoking saved his life, if he is able to say russell wasn't funny.

[@karthikmouli]

42 : the "Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything", calculated by an enormous supercomputer named Deep Thought over a period of 7.5 million years...and the maximum number of chicken nuggets you can buy at mcd. Coincidence?

[@joejohnson8789]

Except 42 wasn't the answer to life, the universe, and everything. As they actually asked what is the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. Turns out the ultimate question was "what do you get if you multiply 6 by 9?"

[@tk9780]

43 is "The meaning of life, the universe, and everything"

[@_xV01Dx_]

That's 42

[@tk9780]

@@_xV01Dx_ You're right, at least I now know why my universe is so broken.

[@EebstertheGreat]

Wait quick, how do I math?

[@Bronzescorpion]

2+2=4-1=3 quick math. Just extrapolate on that.

[@TanjoGalbi]

That should be "how do I do maths". (yes I'm English :P )

[@woutervan8019]

First you got to prove 1+1=2.

[@ravusursi893]

You can buy 43 chicken nuggets - a 20, a 9, a 6 plus two children’s happy meals which contain 4 per serving. 20+9+6+4+4=43

[@ginge641]

6:40 Aisling thinks she needs to do that.

[@ishashka]

Plot twist: the book is just the word "French" repeated over and over

[@KaJeTheRiPPer]

Hey, guys, can you please put the episodes where the clips are from? Thanks.. To all of the videos.. 😘😘😘

[@SmolenskiPrince]

No.

[@dunebasher1971]

It's not actually too hard to Google the guests and find out which episode it was that way.

[@Matthew_007]

Sorry to break it to you Sandi but if you buy twenty nuggs, nine nuggs and six nuggs with two nugg happy meals then you have 43 nuggs! 🕺

[@noneck8166]

Damn.....Aisling Bea Quite Interesting.....

[@VestigialHead]

+ No Neck Yes she is oddly attractive.

[@zapkvr]

She is sweet.

[@Sickofitall-76]

Susan is the female Johnny Vegas! Spot on!

[@WillZuidema]

They forgot that mcnuggets can be sold as fours in kid's menu... ...

[@zapkvr]

Dave is wonderful.

[@grobannoel]

Yep, he always is.

[@zapkvr]

@@grobannoel I've been watching Peep show from the beginning. Friggin hilarious

[@Zach90888]

Nuggets thing isn’t true, 4 nugs in a happy meal 9+9+9+4+4+4+4=43

[@MartinHeavisides]

Russell and Whitehead wrote Principia Mathematica, Stephen.

[@bradleynoneofyourbizz5341]

@7:12 My, my, my!

[@TanjoGalbi]

43 is very unimportant due to being overshadowed by the number that comes before it :D

[@rageagainstmyhairline5574]

I understand your Hitchhiker's Guide reference :D

[@CynBH]

It's also incorrect. You can get McNuggets in packs of 4 ( *if* you order a Happy Meal).

[@TanjoGalbi]

@@CynBH it has already been established that the show is not correct on that fact now but at the time it was aired on TV it was correct. Facts can change!

[@CynBH]

@@TanjoGalbi 1.) 4 packs in the Happy Meal have been available for at least 20 years. That fact isn't new. 2.) I apparently failed miserably at sarcasm. Oops. Oh well. 🤷

[@TanjoGalbi]

@@CynBH Yep, you failed at sarcasm. There was nothing in what you wrote to indicate any sarcasm at all as it reads as nothing but factual :)