William Dunham - Theorems as Masterpieces - The Gathering at Keystone 2018

[@colt1954]

I love this guy

[@AsBi1]

I loved his book Journey Through Genius

[@oker59]

E.T. Bell should win a post-humous(obviously, now that he's long gone) Nobel prize for Literature, for his "Development of Mathematics.

[@megakeenbeen]

Just ordered men of mathematics

[@oker59]

William looks like he's still got his health; the nano and quantum computer revolutions looks to be right around the corner. We already live in an A.I. era as far as A.I. researchers are concerned. I'm thinking with the breakthroughs in medical technology, William could live for a lot longer; he could go on to make more contributions to inspiring people in mathematics!

[@Israel2.3.2]

I wish I knew more about AI. Professor Dunham's Euler lectures got me interested in mathematics. His exposition of Euler's work on partition theory really got me hooked. The notion that one could use infinite series to derive a result about partitions made my jaw hit the floor.

[@williejohnson5172]

17:58 Hate to burst your bubble but both the theorem and the indirect proof is wrong. Trigonometrically, in the unit circle, the secant at its maximum of two is equivalent to the tangent at its maximum of one. Allowing x=0 and 1=2 then one half equals =1 trigonometrically. In fact in the unit circle, at the origin, pm1=pm0=pm one half=pm 2.

[@samueldeandrade8535]

You are crazy.

[@williejohnson5172]

@@samueldeandrade8535 Here, let me help you out. If you want to be taken seriously you would say something like, "Mr Johnson, you are crazy because your algebra is incorrect when you state... In the unit circle where is half of the entire x axis, which equals 2, located? In the unit circle where is is half of the entire y diameter, which equals 2i, located? What is the value of half of 2? Since -1 equals two applications of i on 1 then i=-.5, which is the solution to the Riemann hypothesis. Starting from any point on the circumference of the unit circle what is one half of 2 or 2i and where is it located in the unit circle? See, this is what is known as algebra, and unless and until you can refute it algebraically, which you can't, then you remain just another spoiled internet gossiper. Gossip will never win over logic and mathematics. Happy to have been of help.

[@samueldeandrade8535]

@@williejohnson5172 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Maaan, stop using drugs. You are hallucinating af!

[@samueldeandrade8535]

​​@@williejohnson5172 Look, "Theorem: There is no solution to the equation (3x+1)/(3x+2) = 1" You said this theorem is wrong. What do you mean? Saying that may have more than one meaning. Are you saying "(3x+1)/(3x+2) = 1" has a solution? You know he is talking with normal people, right? So the context is, at best, real numbers. So what you are saying when you called this theorem wrong is just the absence of the word "real"? Is that it? So, in your opinion, the theorem "Theorem: There is no REAL solution to the equation (3x+1)/(3x+2) = 1" would be right?

[@williejohnson5172]

@@samueldeandrade8535 I gave you the requisite algebra. pm1=pm0=pmi=pm.5=mp2. This is algebraically irrefutable. Period. Now you tell me, given this algebra, why 1 is not a valid solution.

[@samueldeandrade8535]

49:30 oh wow, what a bad taste.

[@zapazap]

I guess he just could not resist venting his polical spleen. It's getting harder to find respite from political partisanship. I say this not ass Trump fan, but as one who is such of it all.. Indeed, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth. A shame, since the lecture was, otherwise, damned near perfect.

[@samueldeandrade8535]

@@zapazap exactly! Actually, I am NOT a fan of pseudopolitics they try to sell as politics nowadays. Which implies I despise all politicians equally. Thanks for making my day. Have a nice day/night.

[@samueldeandrade8535]

9:42 "... M plus M plus M plus M" So ... 4M. Man, what a boring example. Just prove "product of perfect squares is a perfect squares" Easy af.

[@zapazap]

A beautiful lecture, marred only by gratuitous polemical snark.