Imagine a bank that pays 100% interest per year, after a year you have... $0, because it's a scam.
@DreadKyller4 жыл бұрын
Imagine a bank that pays 100% interest per year, but it's really that they pay 1,000,000% interest after 10,000 years.
@joaoviniciusrm3 жыл бұрын
It's not a scam, it's called Argentina
@ShamoKwok3 жыл бұрын
You don't have any money in the bank
@herbie_the_hillbillie_goat3 жыл бұрын
A bank pays 100% interest? Now we're talking imaginary numbers.
@smanzoli3 жыл бұрын
@@joaoviniciusrm that would be a bit of interest + a lot of inflation (monetary correction)...
@ojasbhagavath54844 жыл бұрын
Both English professors and Math professors agree that 'e' is everywhere.
@Tokinjester4 жыл бұрын
😂👍
@guythatdoesthings49353 жыл бұрын
Good one lol
@ojasbhagavath54843 жыл бұрын
@@sthenios7026 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
@ltloxa11593 жыл бұрын
"You can't write a text problem without using the letter e"
@binmahin71843 жыл бұрын
Comment of the Year
@Tiqerboy5 жыл бұрын
One of the first applications of 'e' I remember is in the case of radioactive decay because the rate of decay is proportional to the amount that is left.
@javierduenasjimenez79303 жыл бұрын
I also remember that there was an exact formula on the reducement of sound intensity while it "moved" trough the air.
@pseudoduckk30292 жыл бұрын
Yeah radioactivity too, also in growth and decay of current in inductive circuits, simple harmonics, wave motion(strings and electromagnetic), basically e is everywhere but I like only when it is in differentiation lol
@m19u3l11 Жыл бұрын
Underrated comment
@repeater64 Жыл бұрын
Yeah I think quite a lot of the places it comes up is as solutions to differential equations due to the property of e to the power of x differentiating to itself. That explains the cooling curve, damped harmonic motion, radioactive decay, and probably explains some of the other things in this video.
@bjornfeuerbacher55144 ай бұрын
For most exponential growth and decay problems, you don't need e at all, you can use _any_ basis.
@koktszfung5 жыл бұрын
The number 1 is seriously everywhere
@Guztav13375 жыл бұрын
We are number ONE!
@Cjnw5 жыл бұрын
…and that happens to be e to ( 2 * pi times the square root of -1 )
@JustinSulak5 жыл бұрын
You know what’s amazing is that your comment was posted 1 month ago 😮
@nT-sp4qd5 жыл бұрын
11:11
@nickl67525 жыл бұрын
When he was talking about convergence, I was like this is why I start at 1.
@brookej04 жыл бұрын
I feel like 'e' is some snippet of our universe's source code that we weren't supposed to discover and the developers must be really pissed off about it 😂
@AirshipToday3 жыл бұрын
@Paul Wolf No. It comes from compound interest
@carsonllorente4813 жыл бұрын
@Paul Wolf you’re probably thinking of pi, e doesn’t come from geometrical algebra
@kiwiboy19993 жыл бұрын
Definitely does seem trancendant, even with increased dimensions from our own. There's something weird in that.
@AirshipToday3 жыл бұрын
@@kiwiboy1999 😂😂
@Jack_Callcott_AU2 жыл бұрын
Even though there are more transcendental numbers than non-transcendental , we only ever seem to talk about a few of them e.g. Pi, e, and a few others. Curious fact is it not.
@ivanfranco4585 жыл бұрын
ALL I KNOW FROM ENGINEERING SCHOOL IS THAT E = 3
@takvacs5 жыл бұрын
I'm almost certain we went to different schools. There's about 2/e chance.
@Someguy-cs6cj5 жыл бұрын
Yeah same. e=3=π
@chrisryan64645 жыл бұрын
@@Someguy-cs6cj e=3=pi it.s almost never used, and shouldn.t... that's why pi is always 3.14 when you divide the circumference to the diameter, AND NOT 3... and with e the smaller you go the more it goes towards 2.25something
@Guztav13375 жыл бұрын
@Chris Ryan No, that is not it. In Engineering e=3=π. Same goes for 2+2=5 for really large values of 2. (i.e. Under a uniform distribution 2+2=5 in 12.5% of the times)
@chrisryan64645 жыл бұрын
@@Guztav1337 I have heard of 2+2=5 before but never looked into it... what's the deal?
@malou52905 жыл бұрын
d/dx(eˣ) = eˣ is mindblowing really
@zachstar5 жыл бұрын
Even though I'm so used to it, I still find it very weird.
@telecorpse19575 жыл бұрын
@@zachstar For me, as someone who didn't really get into calculus yet, it seems the least weird thing about it. Isn't that the precise definition of e? Is it less weird that if you divide a circle's circumference by its diameter, you get π?
@zachstar5 жыл бұрын
Position will match. Plug in 4.844 into the equation e^t, you'll get the same thing as velocity and acceleration, they're all the same function.
@CalculatedRiskAK5 жыл бұрын
@@AndreasNilsson96 The position does match. d/dx(e^x) explains exactly why. Take the derivative of position, you get velocity. Take the derivative of velocity, you get acceleration. Those three values are all the same for e^x.
@AndreasNilsson965 жыл бұрын
@@CalculatedRiskAK I was wrong, you're right. that make a lot of sense, thanks guys.
@douglasstrother65845 жыл бұрын
I'm an old geezer (56), and have a little envy about this and all of the KZbinr's who publish informative and captivating videos on mathematics, physics, etc. The scope of topics and their graphical representations are captivating and enlightening. Keep up the good work: it is influencing many lives for the better.
@friendlyone27062 жыл бұрын
I'm an older geezer and VERY envious. I struggled to find the books I wanted to read in school & public libraries in the various towns we lived in while growing up. In grade school, Compton's Encyclopedia was my first algebra teacher. I was obsessed with how eyes worked, what was light that eyes could even work... A child today can go to the net and indulge in "rabbit hole" style learning to his/her heart's content. Rabbit hole learning leads to more interesting questions and greater insights than can ever happen sitting obediently in class. My only regret: Today's young will never fully appreciate the feast before them because they have never known starvation. I don't want them to experience starvation, but it is good to recognize and appreciate luxury.
@douglasstrother65842 жыл бұрын
@@friendlyone2706 Agreed! "The World Book Encyclopedia" and "Time-Life Science Library" was what I grew-up with.
@friendlyone27062 жыл бұрын
@@douglasstrother6584 One of the schools I attended had World Book, and another favorite were the All About books.
@theblinkingbrownie4654 Жыл бұрын
@@friendlyone2706I am a youngin and I sort of wish to experience this starvation you speak of to increase my desire for learning. Too bad it would waste too much time that could be saved by simple google searches. Oh well, our generations have to encounter its fair share of problems too with corporations getting increasingly more efficient at capturing our attention, getting addicted is easier than ever. How I wish I could obtain the benefits of every era without the drawbacks
@Bhagya-AP Жыл бұрын
You're not old at all! 56 is absolutely young and thriving.
@justgame55085 жыл бұрын
3:59 Note to self, always go in the 38th place to an interview
@gabrielonibudo57105 жыл бұрын
what if it's 101 people
@martinclever3425 жыл бұрын
@@gabrielonibudo5710 actually 101/e~37.2
@mykekinkster4405 жыл бұрын
agreed!
@dyllandonze7445 жыл бұрын
This only works if they are interviewing 100 people and the employer decides to use this strategy in hiring
@martinclever3425 жыл бұрын
@@dyllandonze744 It works for 101 people as well: 99/e < 36.5 < 100/e 101/e < 37.5 < 102/e
Not a physics or math student, I literally limped my way through school to end up slightly successful in banking, and you make me want to rediscover my passion for learning and make me feel like I could tackle quantitative finance. Thank you genuinely and I hope you continue to inspire others to reach higher.
@kennedystapleton22793 жыл бұрын
Not specific to this video alone you’re incredibly funny and intelligent and we need more people like you.
@algorithminc.88505 жыл бұрын
People don't become mathematicians or engineers because it is easy - quite the opposite. This is a great channel - might help people understand how much fun math and engineering really are. He makes many of these topics approachable by those new to the concepts (the viewer is along for the ride in learning in some cases), while also being really interesting to those who already have backgrounds.
@MasterofFace5 жыл бұрын
Math is easy
@kostas9195 жыл бұрын
@@MasterofFace then you probably know shit
@Tom-vu1wr3 жыл бұрын
@@kostas919 definitely not at uni yet
@arqamkhan82303 жыл бұрын
Have u ever thought of the possibility that somethings would never be fun for someone no matter how much they invest their time in it unless they have nothing else to do which is unlikely and btw before u say something i have my fair share of math
@lucusekali57672 жыл бұрын
Agree
@ramimerza6445 жыл бұрын
I'm falling in love with math
@wesleymiller86614 жыл бұрын
-Ing?
@kunaldhawan59524 жыл бұрын
@@wesleymiller8661 you and me both
@DavidThomas0054 жыл бұрын
i like math videos. i hate math class
@sadatnafis20323 жыл бұрын
same
@liambennett13893 жыл бұрын
Oh yeah? How fast?
@Porururidimu5 жыл бұрын
I don't understand a single thing but sounds cool
@MrCmon1135 жыл бұрын
That's better than the illusion of understanding.
@VoidHalo5 жыл бұрын
Watch enough times and/or enough different videos about e and natural log and you will.
@--_96235 жыл бұрын
@@VoidHalo Did you so?
@playerscience3 жыл бұрын
@@stonecat676 the concepts that you mentioned are not at all hard... 🤦😂😂😂
@ossiehalvorson77023 жыл бұрын
@@VoidHalo Ehhhh, not really. Mathematics is ultimately logical. You could copy a logic circuit enough times and maybe understand how the signal travels, but without understanding the gates it's made of, you won't actually understand it. The second someone asks you to design your own variation on the circuit, it falls apart. A structure without a foundation is going to be a very unstable structure. You need to understand the elements that come before first, otherwise it's closer to mimicry than it is to an understanding.
@rextransformation74184 жыл бұрын
10:30 "Or when you take a π out of the oven..." '¬_¬
@Dr.FeelsGood4 жыл бұрын
Oh my...an obvious pun masquerading as a joke. Your only way out of this one is to admit you are a dad.
@javierduenasjimenez79303 жыл бұрын
Bruh, I thought that he was reffering to number π until the pie picture appeared on the screen😂
@zoeymccann1244 жыл бұрын
e is everywhere, literally. even in the word everywhere four times
@FischlInsultsMePls4 жыл бұрын
underrated
@elgordobondiola3 жыл бұрын
It isn't in this conjunction
@augusto2563 жыл бұрын
wich is the number of times where a fraction gets it's closest approximation
@splenden22353 жыл бұрын
@@Agvazela_Vega the
@zebran43 жыл бұрын
e isn't litteraly everywhere. For instance, it isn't in my couch.
@BangMaster965 жыл бұрын
What i don't get is, how can people figure this out? I can do basic calculus, algebra, linear algebra, etc.., but then, i see things like from this video, and it just completely blows my mind. Like, how is an individual able to find out formulas for real world systems? For example, formulas for fluid dynamics, or circuit analysis, etc..What do they do that helps then derive these formulas? Again, look at Maxwell's equations, how did he come up with all those equations? What did he do that led to him deriving those equations? Also with fourier transform, how did he figure out what variables and equations to use? Math just goes out of my mind once i start learning many of the abstract concepts, there truly are some real geniuses on this planet, just the fact that those people can understand what an equation is doing, and how to derive those equations is beyond my scope of understanding.
@Victor-jd5om5 жыл бұрын
Ikr
@Tomahawks3605 жыл бұрын
It is mostly because these people know what math means. What a derivate, an integral, a sum, etc. means on a practical level. For example, the typical example of a bacteria colony. When studing it, you can measure that, for example, they tend to reduce their pop with the influence of an antibiotic. You get data, the pop of bateria on different period of time, graph the results, and then you can see that they tend to reduce their pop with a certain speed. What speed means on math? Derivate. So you have a derivate of an unknown function. But for that is calculus! You use differentials, integrals and natural log to make an equation that sync with this mysterious function. As you could see, math is not the only thing needed, but also a fuck ton of experimentation and data registred. I mean, Maxwell needed first some data about the electromagnetic phenomena to actually make math that could describe the behaviour he was seeing. And again, the same as before: Ah, electromagnetic field kinda work like vector fields. Ah, I see that the magnetic field always close on itself, I can describe that using the Divergence. Ah, I see the change of magnetic field makes the electric field spin, I could describe that using derivates (that describe change) and curls (that describe rotation). It is like seeing math like a language; as certain objects and actions can be transcribe in words, certain phenomenas can be transcribe in functions and operators, and knowing correctly the basic ones can be enough to write everything you see on math. Now, there exist the really true geniuses that can discover the depht secrets of nature without any experimental data, just using math. I'm amaze and confused about how Newton discover the Lineal Momentum using only math. But again, it seems it's because he knows what math means out of the paper. So, my recommendation? Try to learn what your calculus and algebra means. What are the descriptions and meanings of limits, derivates, integrals, and so on. And not just how to use them. I mean read, words. And then, try to do inverse engineering on all these famous equations, what they say to you just seeing the math. Obviously, that doesn't mean you are going to get as gut as Einstein or Newton just doing that. But at least it could help to take a step forward on your understanding about the world. And if you're an engineer, it could really help. I mean, legends say that Faraday was absolute shit with maths, and that that is the only reason of why today we talk about Maxwell's equations instead of Faraday's equations.
@BangMaster965 жыл бұрын
@@Tomahawks360 I agree, at some point, you need to have a solid foundation of basic mathematics, after which, you can build on top of your foundations. Newton, Einstein, Maxwell, were definitely one of the smartest minds this planet has ever had. Another one is David Hilbert, who was one of the most influential mathematician of 20th century. These people didn't see math as manipulation of number, but rather, a tool to use and explain nature and the universe. I will try to rebuild my foundations, and hope i can at least get a glimpse of what it feel like to be a true mathematician.
@Tomahawks3605 жыл бұрын
@@BangMaster96 I wish the best of luck to you. If this is your passion, then it will be one of the most fun and joyful experience you could have.
@JordanMetroidManiac5 жыл бұрын
Well, it takes a deeper understanding of reality (everything) to discover and prove such properties of a mere number. The people who do that don’t stop learning about math at basic calculus, algebra, and linear algebra. They go onto learning about more abstract mathematics such as topology, modern algebra (A.K.A. group theory), etc. Such areas of math include concepts that aren’t so applicable to the real world as calculus or linear algebra are, but they are applicable to revealing *deep* relations in the universe. It’s mind blowing, to say the least.
@bryan.flores5 жыл бұрын
Im starting to notice that numbers are everywhere in math🤯
@nikstoun94784 жыл бұрын
😑
@Tokinjester4 жыл бұрын
Snap out of it, you're being irrational
@adamuhaddadi53323 жыл бұрын
@@Tokinjester get real smh ;)
@Tokinjester3 жыл бұрын
@@adamuhaddadi5332 don't be so negative :p
@adamuhaddadi53323 жыл бұрын
@@Tokinjester couldint find an other joke :( **sed music plays**
@zachstar5 жыл бұрын
If you want an explanation regarding the even dimensional spheres I made a follow up video! kzbin.info/www/bejne/o4nTYomde7yVgcU But several other examples here don't really come with an explanation since I was trying to go for range rather than depth (or else the video would've been very long). But I put several resources in the description for anyone who wants further reading.
@natevanderw5 жыл бұрын
Great video. I wish my students rose to your level. I jump up down in class trying to explain how cool the number e is. Next time I make them watch this video and give them a quiz!
@LYNXzTwist5 жыл бұрын
@@sifatullahalk e^x has many applications in APD and ODEs, things you'll learn in engineering, as the differential of e^x is e^x it is crucial for solving ordered differentials
@peybro4 жыл бұрын
2:24 when you get caught stealing cookies by your German grandmother
@rextransformation74184 жыл бұрын
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👍 Das ist smart!!! 😂😂
@ian77923 жыл бұрын
Lol
@infernocaptures87395 жыл бұрын
You're the first person who made me *actually* understand the gamma function.
@herkules5935 жыл бұрын
Cool then explain why Γ(n)=n! holds Getting explained what it does isn't the same as understanding. Understanding in maths is understanding proofs.
@Fokalopoka5 жыл бұрын
@@herkules593 gamma of n is actually (n-1)!, the n! function is capital pi of n function, which is same function as gamma of n-1
@leonthethird74944 жыл бұрын
@@herkules593 so pretentious
@DreadKyller4 жыл бұрын
@@herkules593 Do I need to understand every detail about how the bread I use is made in order for me to make a sandwich? Do I need to understand exactly how the planks of wood I use are harvested and cut to use them for building? Do I need to understand exactly how the circuitry in the CPU of my computer is constructed in order to write a program for it? People already figured out many times over how the gamma function works and how to calculate it, if I need to use it as part of a larger product/problem I would almost never need to understand exactly why it works, only that it does. Really the only time I'd absolutely need to, is in constructing particularly complex proofs about whatever I find using it. If I'm not dealing with trying to find proofs, there's little reason to need to know, in depth, how the gamma function works, just what it does. It's a bit pretentious to act as if not understanding all the details means you don't understand anything about it.
@Nylspider3 жыл бұрын
@@herkules593 extremely rude
@korelly3 жыл бұрын
In another video on this subject, they explained this: Take the letters ABC and count all permutations possible (ACB, BAC, BCA...) you will find there are 6 (or 3!) of them. Count the cases where no letter is in its alpbabetical order. You will find 2 cases: BCA and CAB. 6 divided by 2 makes 3, which is slightly higher than 2.71828... Now do the same experience with ABCD. You will get 24 permutations possible, or 4!. And count how many cases have no letter in its alphabetical order. There are 9 of them. 24/9 = 2.66666666.... That is closer to e. If you do that experience with growing numbers of letters, you will get always closer to e.
@sambhavsongara30879 ай бұрын
What you are talking about is the sub factorial notarion, !n
@doomerman9655 жыл бұрын
You can also use Euler's formula to solve higher order differential equations with complex roots.
@rithvikmuthyalapati97542 жыл бұрын
The fifth case of high order DE's
@984francis5 жыл бұрын
"That's what you learned at high school, minimum." I seriously doubt more than 2% of the population knows that.
@takvacs5 жыл бұрын
2.71828% to be exact.
@holdenhill285 жыл бұрын
It's in the basic Algebra 2 curriculum
@takvacs5 жыл бұрын
@@holdenhill28 Studying is not knowing.
@jakobwachter51815 жыл бұрын
2% of the population knows it because they only learn it once per year. If it was continuously learned then 2.71828% of the population would understand and this video could reach a larger audience. I blame the public school system.
@SirNyanPanda5 жыл бұрын
People dumb amirite
@vib805 жыл бұрын
And, of course, you posted this on 1/e day! The point of the year that's 1/e through it, so it's the point where if you were doing an optimal stopping algorithm over the year you'd switch from sampling to select.
@Pining_for_the_fjords5 жыл бұрын
This video is trippy. Is this what doing an e feels like?
@jpkellerman70565 жыл бұрын
I am a chemistry major and use e all the time but never understood where it came from or why to use it. It was just something I accepted as remember formula and use calculator but the first bit about (1+1/999999)^999999 just somehow made me grasp it alot more. would love to see more on this but maby focused more on why and how. thank you alot by the way
@nagarmalsharma99925 жыл бұрын
You're a chemistry major and you didn't study limits in your highschool? Kinda weird
@fizwiz813 жыл бұрын
The part about Euler’s formula being all over textbooks is 100% true. I am in college right now and it is all we do in my physics class, and it’s all I do in my differential equations class
@joshgoddard4724 жыл бұрын
Ive just found out about your channel and only having watched three of your videos I am already in love with the information you are interested in and the way that you are able to communicate said information and am very excited to binge your content and add to your already large amount of support
@kebabmarley25055 жыл бұрын
"E" - markiplier
@ViratKohli-jj3wj4 жыл бұрын
Lolololol
@elliotbaker54164 жыл бұрын
Markiplier = Leonhardt Euler
@IzzetRight5 жыл бұрын
Loved the video. I'm in algebra 2 but I enjoying learning about higher math concepts as I absolutely love math. Every now and then I'll spend some time (1h +) trying to find new math patterns or explain something to myself. I've been wondering for a while how fractional factorials were calculated. Now I know. Mind = Blown.
@HollywoodF15 жыл бұрын
There are a few things that you come across where there is actually a more general explanation for something than the one you first learned. Turns out that the explanation for factorial that people are taught is a special case for integers. Just like a circle is a special case of an ellipse and Newtonian Mechanics is a special case of Relativistic Mechanics. It's an important lesson for the science-minded: Beware of the possibility of a more general explanation. Some of humankind's greatest discoveries resulted from this kind of thinking.
@IzzetRight5 жыл бұрын
@@HollywoodF1 That is really cool.
@electriclizardwizard4 жыл бұрын
3:03 the 5 of diamonds and queen of clubs remained in the same location
@lunam72494 жыл бұрын
Your awesome!!you made “e” happy!!
@chlo_z75665 жыл бұрын
*sees Euler's identity* *remembers how hard complex analysis was* *hisses*
@kerrym70895 жыл бұрын
This was my favorite course in undergrad!
@xMrJanuaryx5 жыл бұрын
... e made complex analysis easier not harder foo
@mykekinkster4405 жыл бұрын
lol, agreed!
@chlo_z75665 жыл бұрын
@@xMrJanuaryx Oh it made the lower math stupid easy, but I meant the class in general. I struggled with key hole contours mainly.
@allenzhang82615 жыл бұрын
take spherical harmonics
@evccrtt14805 жыл бұрын
I wish I had money to pay brilliant
@randomdude91354 жыл бұрын
Or some Noble soul would pirate it for greater good
@redpandarepresent63805 жыл бұрын
We love u man...... thank you for all of this
@iftahkotlerr76015 жыл бұрын
Another great video by majorprep, I actully try to prove stuff from the probability part, I have test on that next week so thanks for the more preparation on that!
@gspaulsson4 жыл бұрын
as an ex-programmer, the job interview example reminds me of a tournament-tree sorting algorithm. It also works for evolution by random mutation and natural selection. And e is also the most frequent letter in the English alphabet, so of course it turns up everywhere.
@tyler895575 жыл бұрын
"When would e show up in the real world?" *Calculates composite interest* *Calculates things like Gibbs Free Energy and K in chemistry*
@jakez0825 жыл бұрын
"Or just look at an electromagnetism text book" I swore I'd never open that thing after E and M again.
@Kevin-cy2dr5 жыл бұрын
Man you are doing a great job. Trust me, you deserve better.
@farhanislam84633 жыл бұрын
Thanks a lot. I'm learning statistics, and I always wondered why they just assume euler's number. Probability makes so much more sense now.
@crazyfly55052 жыл бұрын
This would be a great series. You should do all the constants! Please 🙏
@crazyfly55052 жыл бұрын
Ok I just looked at Wikipedia to see what I just asked you to do. Supergolden ratio??? Mathematicians, SMDH
@crazyfly55052 жыл бұрын
Ok I just looked at Wikipedia to see what I just asked you to do. Supergolden ratio??? Mathematicians, SMDH
@Iguield5 жыл бұрын
These videos are awesome and when you film yourself instead of just commenting over images the video gets much more interesting!
@zachstar5 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Yeah been trying to find the right balance of that, think the in person aspect at least makes it more personal.
@folzbox4875 жыл бұрын
Why ?
@tupaicindjeke2755 жыл бұрын
Dude you are a BOSS. Good luck, you will soon have a million subscribers...
@mathematicsfanatic8325 жыл бұрын
This channel is love
@MitchBurns3 жыл бұрын
The first half of this video I hadn’t heard of any of it before, but it was interesting and made sense. The second half was all stuff I learned in college as an EE. They really drill it into you, and don’t explain it half as well as they really should.
@Scaro.s5 жыл бұрын
Loving your recent run of videos. Very interesting dedicated channel. Keep it up 👍
@Drarck_5 жыл бұрын
I found this channel few days ago now I'm hooked in it, how didn't I know you existed? xD keep the good work dude
@johnbillings5260 Жыл бұрын
It makes you wonder about all of the things that have yet to be discovered to have math tied to e.
@fizixx4 жыл бұрын
There is a king's ransom of golden nuggets of information and fascinating concepts here. Great, greatvid, thanks!
@robertschlesinger13425 жыл бұрын
Absolutely superb mathematics video that I recommend for most all HS and college students, as well as those that have gone beyond a college degree.
@matthewcarrillo42875 жыл бұрын
Lovin the support from Brilliant! Great platform supporting a great mind. Congrats.
@mridulbarman41145 жыл бұрын
What a Channel !!! KZbin algorithm sometimes surprises you.
There are several great books on e at varying levels of difficulty. Amazingly, Euler had vision problems for a significant part of his life and was blind during his later years, yet he continued to produce important mathematics. He endured a cataract operation, and during those years it must have been pure torture. The operation was not successful.
@rparl2 жыл бұрын
My first differential equation text was a revision which covered the Heavyside transform and had a short section showing how similar the Laplace transform was. A later text discussed the Laplace transform but completely omitted the now obsolete Heavyside transform. When I got to UC Berkeley, I looked up the origin of the Laplace transform and found that it was an offshoot of his tome on celestial mechanics. At one point he needed a technique and interrupted the tome to dash off a slim volume on an obscure element of math. He then used that in his tome. The slim volume was mostly ignored by those studying Laplace's work and it was well after WWII that the Heavyside transform was discarded as an unsupported "seat of your pants" technique.
@kvartlapp97244 жыл бұрын
Back in high school I had a very serious math teacher. He never smiled or showed any other emotions. Until one day, after being done with both trig. functions and imaginary numbers. You could see the excitement behind his eyes and he said "I really have to show you something! It's not really in the curriculum, but you really need to see this!". He then proceeded to derive Euler's formula on the blackboard, and he had tears in his eyes when he was done. He almost started crying while stating that "this is the most beautiful thing in the universe".
@razmuzen10904 жыл бұрын
Wtf :D
@yat_ii3 жыл бұрын
i made a proof for eulers formula and i love it but im not quite that mad about it
@christophvonpezold4699 Жыл бұрын
Interesting fact: you can actually type in infinity for the upper bound of the integral for the gamma function and Desmos will just automatically plug in an obscenely large number for you
@jakobwachter51815 жыл бұрын
If you've taken calc you know why it shows up so often. It's got to do with that pretty little mention that the derivative of e^x is just itself. (For non-calc students, the derivative of something is what the slope of that thing is if you made a straight line out of a really tiny segment of it). It was mentioned in passing in this video but it's really a powerful assumption. It allows things like differential equations, which relate a function to their own derivative, to be solvable. Sticking a mass on a spring in a fluid is a prime example of a differential equation. As follows: The sum of all forces = mass times acceleration; acceleration being the second derivative of position with respect to time. F = ma. The force on a spring, as described by Hooke's Law, is F1 = -kx. There's also a dampening force caused by the fluid, which is proportional to the velocity (a derivative of position); F2 = -bv. F1 + F2 = ma, which can then all be put in terms of X (You may use the ' [prime] symbol as a way to recognize a derivative); -kx - bx' = mx'', which then leads to mx'' + bx' + kx = 0. You can thus easily see how physical systems take into account their position and its relation to everything else. In fact, this is more common than you think: dynamic systems, circuits, electric fields, classical mechanics and plenty of other fields take into account this relation of position and its derivatives to the motion of a body. You really don't want to have to use more than one equation to explain this behavior because you'd like to keep things as simple as possible. Therefore e really is a big player in a whole bunch of different fields. It's worth checking to see whether or not a function you've had to memorize was brought about by a differential equation because quite often it is. NOTE: Really the only situation in which the above function works is if your function x is either 0 or an exponential function. By proxy, a combination of sines and cosines will also represent the value, but this is only in specific circumstances (AKA whenever imaginary numbers get involved). Any other type and it would spiral out of control! Go ahead: try and solve this function with anything that isn't in the form e^(cx), where c is any value. I guarantee nothing will line up quite right.
@antonbashkin67063 жыл бұрын
This is really clear! Great explanation.
@lewissjj14175 жыл бұрын
I honestly have a lot of respect for Matematicians, Physicists and scientists, etc. It's just amazing how they can explain and understand unexplainable phenomena. I'm a 10th grader and i just know how to use sin, cos and tan (pretty lame yeah). So you can imagine my reaction throughout this video seing "gamma function" and "quantum mecanics" stuff. It's not that I'm not interested at all, It's just really overwhelming.
@BirdTurdMemes Жыл бұрын
How is this now 19 year old doing?
@janbergen5 жыл бұрын
oh nice. i can now calculate umbrella picking probabilities. Thanks Euler. needed that.
@XetXetable5 жыл бұрын
I'm surprised you didn't even mention the basic calculus of e, since I'd say that's where all these applications come from, ultimately. e, or more accurately the exponential function exp(x) = e^x, is the unique function such that exp(0) = 1 and the derivative of exp(x) is exp(x). This means that the rate of growth of exp(x) is exactly the size of exp(x). This is why the exponential function (and really never e on its own) shows up; it's THE way we have to model situations where size directly determines rate of growth. It's also worth noting that the trig functions come from almost the same place; in the case of cos(x), it's the unique function such that the second derivative of cos(x) is -cos(x), while cos(0) = 1 and cos'(0) = 0. Sine is almost the same as cos, but sin(0) = 0 and sin'(0) = 1. In other words, when acceleration of growth is negatively proportional to size, sin and cos will show up in much the same way exp(x) does.
@MatthewLuigamma0325 жыл бұрын
You're right, but I think the focus in this video was on the applications of e. At 7:00, the reason the velocity is equal to the position is because velocity is the derivative of the position function. As the derivative of e^x is e^x, they're the same! Same deal with acceleration, which is the derivative of velocity.
@philipphoehn38835 жыл бұрын
He literally went over it in the video but used velocity to show differentiation and area to show integration
@christianescobar-gonzalez8905 жыл бұрын
I'm starting school as a math major, love your videos!
@davinonnenmacher72725 жыл бұрын
Quality content. Thanks!
@dijonstreak3 жыл бұрын
SO thankful. !! and timely ..been studying Laplace Transform + other Integrals and always just what the heck did " e " stand for. ??!! thanks to YOU now i KNOW. Whoo-Hoo. !!
@PM-gt9mh5 жыл бұрын
Why didn‘t you say a thing about Leonard Euler himself? He was such a genius, even besides the Euler number his work is just everywhere. The man really is the father of mathematics (I read that description of him in a book about great mathematicians). Would‘ve loved to learn more about him! Otherwise very cool video, you really put some effort in finding all these examples!
@zachstar5 жыл бұрын
There’s always more I want to talk about in these videos. But after 15 minutes I really just have to choose. Euler himself could definitely be a great video on its own regarding just some of the things he did.
@PM-gt9mh5 жыл бұрын
MajorPrep Yeah of course, you definitely have to narrow things down a lot... If you make a L. Euler Video, I would hit that like button so damn hard!
@L0j1k5 жыл бұрын
Because everybody already knows Euler was dope. Also isn't it really a video about Euler anyway, that the video is about this number, one of the most fundamental constants in all of math and science, which is named after Euler?
@mykekinkster4405 жыл бұрын
i never knew his first name was leo.... thnks for that
@erik-ic3tp5 жыл бұрын
Why Euler? Why not Euclid or Pythagoras? :)
@Slugcat3177 ай бұрын
this autoplayed after a skit and it took me a solid 2 minutes to figure out it was an actual math video
@mackk1235 жыл бұрын
this video taught me that banks are ripping us off.
@gabrielbarrantes69464 жыл бұрын
Lol, that is true but not for that reason
@master3000hd5 жыл бұрын
Man when you said the gamma function you gave me flash backs to university. The gamma fuction is so important it even show on stadistics.
@LimLux3 жыл бұрын
Fun fact: Euler wasn't the first one to discover this number, but he was the one that made it famous, named it after him and did unimaginable things with it.
@ravitejakakarala7858 Жыл бұрын
Who discovered it ?
@zertico_kawaii670 Жыл бұрын
@@ravitejakakarala7858 me trust me fr
@Amine-gz7gq Жыл бұрын
@@ravitejakakarala7858 bernoulli
@SpiritVector4 жыл бұрын
That gamma function, and the sum of even dimensional spheres was crazy!
@thegabrielchannel8185 жыл бұрын
The golden ratio is the most mysterious, in my opinion.
@typecasto3 жыл бұрын
1:55 "and that's the bare minimum we learned in high school" i wish our teachers explained that AT ALL, they just told us "here's the formula, e is around 2.7, memorize it."
@dislikebutton6467 Жыл бұрын
Who’s here after the animation vs math video to understand that silly e?
@gat0tsu Жыл бұрын
dude this channel is awesome. thanks for the videos
@mizuhonova4 жыл бұрын
3:33 was a weird example. If you have N candidates and you first interview N/X of them, then your probability of having the best candidate in that pool is gonna be 1/X no matter what X is. I'm not sure why e is special or relevant in this example.
@ananmaysahu45634 жыл бұрын
wwell... so ur saying i interview all of them and pick none, which would be the same as picking n/x with x being one, then the chance of picking the best candidate would be 1/x, therefore 1/1 as in i would deefinitely pick the best one? wtf bro/sis/whatever ur genders nickname is. also i think u understood the example wrong so maybe watch it again? interviewing n/e people (ill call them the first category)and then picking the next one who is better than all the ones in the first category gives u a one by e chance of getting the best candidate.
@mizuhonova4 жыл бұрын
@@ananmaysahu4563 You should watch the video again if you're unsure how the math works. In the video, the values are N=100 and X=e. The formula is exactly the same. I just abstract it to N and X to show that the case X=e is not special.
@mizuhonova4 жыл бұрын
For example, if you did N=100 X=2 You interview the first N/2=50 people Then your probability of picking the best candidate is 1/X = 1/2 = 50% It's pretty obvious that interviewing 50 people out of 100 will net you 50% chance of finding the best one. That's why I'm saying there's nothing special about using X=e here. It's an obvious conclusion that interviewing N/X will net 1/X chance of getting the best person whether X=e or X was some other number.
@ananmaysahu45634 жыл бұрын
@@mizuhonova did... Did u not read my comment?
@ananmaysahu45634 жыл бұрын
Abstract the value to 1. X=1 Just try it.
@crazyfly55052 жыл бұрын
I understood almost everything you said. You're really good at this! Thanks
@ThomasTheThermonuclearBomb2 жыл бұрын
12:28 Well obviously 0!=1 this is basic math (excuse my programming joke)
@lolzhunter3 жыл бұрын
theres a hidden e^2 in the leaning tower of lire equation i found, you take the ratio between how many blocks/cards it would take to get at least 1 more block, so take the ratio of 2 block length and 3 block length and you will get a rough approximation, keep going and the approximation gets more and more accurate
@danfox79205 жыл бұрын
I feel like the e^(-kt) point is a bit of a stretch. Literally anything can be written as e^k, so I don't really see why that would be important.
@hasankalla53735 жыл бұрын
Thats actually a very interesting formula which can be applied to Newtons rate of cooling, Population studies, Bacteria growth... Anything in which the rate of change of something is proportional to that same something. Eg dy/dt = ky. This is where that k comes from in the e^(-kt).
@cameronspalding97925 жыл бұрын
We write -k when a quantity decays
@danfox79205 жыл бұрын
@@cameronspalding9792 my point is just that e^-kt = c^-t (where c is a constant value e^k)
@therealchris73785 жыл бұрын
was gonna say the exact same thing, with this reasoning you could make the same argument for any number a as the formula would be a^(-u*t) where u is just log base a of (e^k) which doesn‘t make this case particularly interesting
@zachstar5 жыл бұрын
But the interesting part (as stated above) is that the solution to the differential equation which represents these systems has e in it. And it’s definitely not obvious (to someone who hasn’t taken calc) that when you find the area under the curve 1/x you get a natural log function which of course has e as it’s base.
@johndoyle2347 Жыл бұрын
Dude, I am stealing some mathematics about Big Bounce events from this. You deserve some of the credit for producing this video. Excellent video.
@mr.chaoticgood14695 жыл бұрын
Hey , can you please do a comparison video between chemical and materials engineering?
@tirr12 ай бұрын
This video is amazing ❤,love it !
@tristanlj34095 жыл бұрын
Euler: I will eat your pie if you'll be my plus 1. + 1: OK then we're quit
@punditgi4 жыл бұрын
Fascinating explanation as always. Go, Zach!
@franciscobolzan91344 жыл бұрын
2:15 Ahhhh yes. The engineering theorem is everywhere
@emilyesnyman2 жыл бұрын
Absolutely LOVED this video! Thanks Zach :)
@andysmith59975 жыл бұрын
1/e is not enough, I want a better chance, I’m moving to a universe where e is bigger,oops,sorry,smaller
@realbignoob18864 жыл бұрын
Lmao
@PhilippeCarphin3 жыл бұрын
7:01 Some might say that f'(x) = f(x) is the defining property of e^x, that e is just e^1. In an analysis assignment we started with f'(x) = f(x) (and f(0) = 1) and derived all the other properties of e^x from that, then we proved things like that (1 + 1/n)^n converges to whatever f(1) is. And by "some might say", I mean that I'm one of those people, I say that.
@Rayjayzee5 жыл бұрын
Lord Markiplier: eeeeeeeeeeee
@AlcyonEldara3 жыл бұрын
For the Casimir effect, if this is the "old" paper explaining it using an old version of pertubation theory, you get a divergent series, but after a renormalizzation using the zeta function (which is linked to the gamma function), you get the observed result.
@KevinEontrainer3815 жыл бұрын
Now I understand the E meme
@RobertBrownbrowncone5 жыл бұрын
I Really enjoyed this video, you explained this topic in a very clear and understandable manner. Thank you for making e and imaginary numbers a fun topic to watch.
@nlo1145 жыл бұрын
'Euler's number is in everything, but you didn't know it'. The mathematical equivalent of palm oil.
@shantanushimpi16942 жыл бұрын
Excellent video showing detailed study on e. Thanks
@Isometrix1163 жыл бұрын
9:30 I though that looked familiar and looked at my E&M textbook and what do you know, it’s the same one. I guess every professor assigns this book :) (For anyone wondering, it’s Introduction to Electrodynamics 4e by David J. Griffiths)
@MrLegendGaming Жыл бұрын
Imagine making up some random equation for some random number and now you have the most common universal number
@fatehaligolani77515 жыл бұрын
Thanks a lot man. MAY ALLAH BLESS YOU WITH SUCCESS! JazakAllah
@fet16125 жыл бұрын
7:25 e**x = d/dx(e**x) = d/dx(e**x) P(127) = 127m = 127 m/s = 127 m/s**2 Can you beat that? What a beaty of the Euler's Number!