There are many surprising results in math, and some might say that they are just pure coincidences, but are they really?
Пікірлер: 1 100
@digitalgenius111Ай бұрын
IMPORTANT At 1:02 I said that, in the first 1000 digits of pi, there is a 100% chance that we would see the same digit 3 in a row. That is false. Assuming the sequence is random, there is always a chance that we woudn't see the same digit 3 times in a row. The actual probability is not that easy to calculate. It's approximately 99.99%. Calculating the probability of getting 6 digits in a row also isn't straightforward. I said that that it's 0.1%. It's approximately equal to 0.93%. Thanks for all the comments pointing this out and sorry for the mistake, hope you enjoyed the rest of the video.
@deezman4206Ай бұрын
also, at 0:31 you say that 123321 / 37 is 8679, when it is 3333. minor correction, and point still holds but just wanted to point it out
@KyronAlisonАй бұрын
I HATE YOU FOR MAKING THAT MISTAKE DIGITAL GENIUS MORE LIKE DIGITAL BRAINDEAD ZOMBIE
@Ricardo_VegaАй бұрын
@@KyronAlison bro...
@CadenzaPlayerАй бұрын
@@KyronAlisonbro shut up
@user-sv9op5ec9xАй бұрын
Suggest me a book that contains all these number facts
@RadhakrishnanSrinathanАй бұрын
For every like I'll study for 1 hour
@Randomstopmotions15Ай бұрын
16 hours now
@mentallyd0neАй бұрын
more than a day if study now
@damianzieba5133Ай бұрын
Good luck
@TheSheep1Ай бұрын
2.5 days now
@mqtthew521Ай бұрын
Have fun lil bro
@jandor6595Ай бұрын
When Ramanujan was creating his square, math accepted his terms and conditions
@TailicaiCorporationАй бұрын
Romanujan is the main character with math living inside of his world
@s.o.m.e.o.n.e.28 күн бұрын
@@TailicaiCorporation why did the main character die by fricking tuberculosis :/
@Amit_Pirate27 күн бұрын
The author was mid @@s.o.m.e.o.n.e.
@peterbach927627 күн бұрын
@@s.o.m.e.o.n.e.💀💀💀
@s.o.m.e.o.n.e.27 күн бұрын
@@Amit_Pirate You just called God mid, bruh
@o_s-24Ай бұрын
The square being having Ramanujan's birth date is CRAZY!
@tuures.5167Ай бұрын
Honestly, not that crazy. Ramanujan had an amazing intuition for numbers. He might have noticed his birthday had this property of summing to a prime when divided into two-digit numbers and decided to try if he could expand it into a bigger configuration.
@WhoAmIdotInАй бұрын
@tuures.5167 make a bigger square then. It ain't that crazy right?
@ProfeSobicoАй бұрын
@@tuures.5167 actually, indeed, it's that crazy. Think about the probabilities that a math genius had born exaclty this square describes this birth day
@Premium-ie5zdАй бұрын
.
@JohnWilliams-gy5ycАй бұрын
God is a math nerd sounds more depressed than the devil is one.
@ytkerfuffles6429Ай бұрын
Correction about pi: the chance of getting 6 of a SPECIFIC digit in a row in the first 1000 is 0.1%, but the chance of getting 6 of ANY digit in a row is 1% as it can be any of the digits 0 to 9. This is a super common mistake.
@katakana1Ай бұрын
Hello
@pixtane7427Ай бұрын
Still 1% is low
@ytkerfuffles6429Ай бұрын
@@pixtane7427 yeah but this is such a common mistake that it even used to be on the wiki so its kinda infuriating
@phiefer3Ай бұрын
correction: the chance of getting 6 of the same digit within the first 1000 digits of pi is 100%. The digits of pi are not random, it's a constant, that 999999 is always guaranteed to be there.
@mrkitten999Ай бұрын
@@phiefer3People like you are the reason I have to solve all my math curiosities myself
@YT-AleX-1337Ай бұрын
I think I'll now call my calculator the 37-pad
@the_Earth_3Ай бұрын
😂😂😂
@janhorvath1417Ай бұрын
And if you ask random people to tell you random digit 1-100 they'll answers are 37.the most and second more 73.
@thedude142Ай бұрын
@@janhorvath1417 besides 69 and 42 of course lol
@djw7141Ай бұрын
@@janhorvath1417veritasium has a good video on this
@CosmicHaseАй бұрын
@@thedude142of course, the stoners
@emilebottoni3437Ай бұрын
why does this video gives a conspiracy theory vibe but about maths?
@Fire_AxusАй бұрын
your vibes are irrational
@stardufsАй бұрын
all of your reply on this vid are irrational @@Fire_Axus
@bilkishchowdhury8318Ай бұрын
@@Fire_Axusvibes>>>rationality
@SBImNotWritingMyNameHereАй бұрын
So is math artificial or natural?
@corvididaecorax299127 күн бұрын
@@SBImNotWritingMyNameHere A bit of both. It started as being used to describe features of how things seem to work. If you have one apple, and another apple, then putting them together gives two apples. There are a lot of properties of math that are actually physical like that, which are then described using rules. But then those rules can also be used for other things, taking us into the realm of 'pure mathematics' which seems disconnected from the natural. But it is all still based in those rules that describe how natural things work. The thing is that occasionally the 'pure mathematics' is later discovered to actually apply to something real, after the math was developed. As an example imaginary numbers were found to be useful in mathematics hundreds of years before they showed up in electrical engineering and quantum mechanics. So it seems in some way that the natural world really does have math at its heart, and we are really just discovering it more than inventing it.
@YudentheepicboyАй бұрын
WAKE UP MY MATH NERDS HES RISEN FROM THE DEAD AND BLESSED OUR INTELLECTUAL CURIOSITY YET AGAIN
@the_Earth_3Ай бұрын
LET’S GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
@xXImposterredbgАй бұрын
Ok
@SlerdusАй бұрын
LETS GOOOOOOO🎉🎉🎉
@bsHugooАй бұрын
🫡🫡
@eaumitheartist1841Ай бұрын
WOOOOOOOOOOOOO
@Miszek3756Ай бұрын
2:13 also after 18281828 there is 459045 which are the angles of half square triangle (45°, 45°, 90°)
@FantyPegasusАй бұрын
Also 1828 is the year of birth of Lev Tolstoy who is Russian writer
@Robin-Dabank696Ай бұрын
Wow I've memorised e up to that part but I've never noticed that
@wesleystreeter4887Ай бұрын
Then there is the first 3 prime numbers 2, 3, 5 and then 360 (full revolution)
@NopeNopeNope9124Ай бұрын
@@FantyPegasus and of many more people probably
@alexthedolphin0939Ай бұрын
i thought that six digit code was somethign else 💀💀💀
@soulsand4287Ай бұрын
4:05 that's how multiples of 9 work. That is literally not a coincidence.
@RobinNashVideos29 күн бұрын
9 | 99 9 + 9 = 18 ≠ 9 The real property is that all multiples of 9 have digits which add up to another multiple of 9, but not necessarily 9 itself. a LOT of these are "literally not a coincidence", yes, 360 included (in fact, the whole point of still using 1/360th of a turn as a degree is bc 360 is a highly composite number, so it divides neatly by a bunch of factors. No surprises there). Still, sum of digits of ANY multiple of 9 isn't always 9 so this property isn't especially more or less coincidental than other entries in the video imo
@drachefly24 күн бұрын
Yeah, the number was too small for the sum of digits to get up to a higher multiple of 9.
@drachefly20 күн бұрын
@@cactus6157 But 9^(-1) is not a multiple of 9, just a power.
@mustafaseyitt18 күн бұрын
It would be 18, or 27, or 36 or any 9k for positive k integers. Its impressive that stays for that much 2^k dividers (360/2⁰ to 360/2⁵)
@cactus615718 күн бұрын
@@mustafaseyitt I thought he was talking about something else that is my fault thank you for your input.
@tkienjoyerАй бұрын
I like how most of these are actually coincidences, it's just so many chances for something "exceptional" to happen it's almost inevitable something will.
@hauntedmopАй бұрын
90% of them feel like coincidences, especially whenever anything is approximated ngl.
@jb7650Ай бұрын
Assuming all digits appear randomly, the chance of having 141592 behind the comma of pi is 1 over a million! What a coincidence!
@habarvaz3142Ай бұрын
BEAUTIFUL I love statistics and how in math there isn't really a "coincidence" the unexpected is expected, every number will theoretically have infinite "special" values and coincidences which will fascinate us, it is expected.
@theterron7857Ай бұрын
For some of them it's true, but all of the patterns of numbers repeating in irrational numbers are coincidences, because they exist only in a base 10 counting system, which is human made. Maths works regardless of how many digits we use to form our numbers, we could write pi only with 0s and 1s if we wanted to, and for any number of digits we use for a counting system, there will be different patterns, so yes. Those are actually all coincidences.
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
all statistics he showed are wrong or misleading
@UltraLuigi2401Ай бұрын
@@theterron7857 While it's not entirely wrong to call them coincidences due to how obvious the patterns are in base 10, looking at the representations in other bases for long enough is bound to lead to the discovery of interesting patterns, simply due to the sheer number of possible patterns one could find. Since the fact that patterns can be found is essentially guaranteed, what the patterns are is irrelevant and calling them coincidences feels a bit disingenuous.
@Fire_AxusАй бұрын
your feelings are irrational
@Fire_AxusАй бұрын
your feelings are irrational
@icarbonised4655Ай бұрын
i feel like you dont understand probabilty, you wouldnt have a 100% probability of getting three digits in a row even if you were considering the first quadrillion digits.
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
yea the whole video is a scam
@seohixАй бұрын
@@midahe5548 no
@matitello4167Ай бұрын
What he means is that it is not rare that there is three digits, because the probabilities of it happening were already met, is like being suprised of winning a 1% prize at your 100 attempt, it still is just 1%, but it had to appear at some point, because you already met the 100% probability, so if it didn't pop off, then it would start being bad luck
@Fire_AxusАй бұрын
your feelings are irrational
@nielskorpel8860Ай бұрын
@@matitello4167 nah. I don't think there is such a thing as meeting percent change at some point, from which point things become more likely or surprising. A 1% event need not happen within the first 100 trials. It need not come every hundred trials. It does not even have to come within the first 1000 trials, or every 1000 trials. The idea that it must, is the gamblers fallacy: the idea that certain outcomes become 'statistically due' to happen if they haven't come in a while, as if the amount of trials, and their outcomes, have some kind of influence on the next one in order to force statistics to balance out. Trials are only independent if such influence does not exist. So while you expect a 1% event every 100 times, there might not be one for 100000 trials and then, suddenly, there could be 1010 in close succession, and the stats would still work.
@Game_Ender4Ай бұрын
0:58 um, that's not at how probability works, what is this guy on?
@E4_E5_KE2Ай бұрын
Idk man but im sure its good stuff
@user-xb5qi8go3dАй бұрын
He just made a small mistake. See in the pinned comment , he accepted it.
@youtubeepicuser420911 күн бұрын
It is. That was my first thought too. I think he means that, for every 100 digits or whatever, each number will appear ten times. It’s a dumb, non-real assumption, but a lot of these things are ridiculous.
@speedcheetah1630Ай бұрын
That magic square isn't magic, it's super-dimentional😮😮😮😮
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
no it's just math. I proved it in three lines (because i was bored)
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
nevermind I though you were talking about the 1st square where this scammer told us to take a numpad and remove the 0
@sevenpenceLOLZАй бұрын
imagine just doing random stuff and then discovering these. (seriously, how did mathematicians figure this out? i’m curious.)
@Vic-ty2beАй бұрын
just playing around aimless. i figured on my own that the n-th derivative of x to the n is equal to n factorial
@FaroshkasАй бұрын
It probably is just because they were doing random stuff. Mathematicians do enjoy maths (surprising, I know!), and we do enjoy to just doodle with numbers and ideas. Some might have been discovered by computers programmed to find stuff like that, but there has been a mind behind it, that probably accidently came across something and wanted to check if it happened again any other time.
@sevenpenceLOLZАй бұрын
@@Faroshkasas a math student (i like to study math a lot but i can’t really consider myself as a mathematician) i thought there was some more complex process behind it. i guess i overlooked it. 😅 thanks for the answer anyway!
@sevenpenceLOLZАй бұрын
@@Vic-ty2beooh…imma try that.
@FaroshkasАй бұрын
@@sevenpenceLOLZ I guess there could be. But, in my experience, when it is something that has no real use, it's just people having fun lol. But maybe there was some deeper reasoning. Ramanujan's square, for example, definitely needed a lot of thought, but I doubt he was trying to solve a real world problem
@Candy-0123Ай бұрын
3:55 this works for every number that is initially divisible by 9. im pretty sure everyone knows that you can figure out a number is divisble by 9 if its digits' sum is divisible by 9
@henrysaid9470Ай бұрын
Yes, but it is actually always a number that is divisible by 9 (999=27, 981=18)
I want to call 360 as "anti-prime". It's divisible by: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 18, 20, 24, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180. By adding them up you get 638, which is bigger, than 360(not including the 1 and 360 itself as divisors).
@user-hs7hw6hq7wАй бұрын
Also did you knew, that 2^n is equal to all the previous 2^n + 2(not including 2^0)? For example, 2^10=2^9+2^8+2^7+2^6+2^5+2^4+2^3+2^2+2^1+2. You can check it
@maddenbanh8033Ай бұрын
@@user-hs7hw6hq7w0 has infinite factors adding up to infinity making it the better anti prime, infact 0 isn't a composite number because it has infinite factors so let's just call it that
@BanNerdHogsАй бұрын
This video's thumbnail and title are almost identical to the ones of the kuvina saydaki's vid. Is this just an another weird coincidence or it has some explanation?
@KuvinaАй бұрын
I made a video on this in January. My video actually explains what is and isn't a coincidence (a lot of these are not). Also, intentional or not, you totally ripped off my thumbnail.
@hashdankhog8578Ай бұрын
yikes
@Pikachulova7Ай бұрын
Damn
@cactiman_2319Ай бұрын
It might be a coincidence (pun intended)
@SmurgleblurgleАй бұрын
Yeah it seems to be a ripoff, down to the thumbnail
@YT7mcАй бұрын
Definitely ripped off
@bacon_with_brussels_sproutАй бұрын
Pi is quite literally the first real example of the library of babel. Every number that will ever be thought of, has already been made
@youtubeepicuser420911 күн бұрын
No, that’s called an irrational number. Pi is one, sq rt 2, e, sq rt 3, sq rt 5, sq rt 11, etc.
@Joao-uj9kmАй бұрын
I'll actually lose sleep over Ramanujan's square
@FrostbearPlushiesАй бұрын
It’s amazing that EVERYTHING revolves around pi.
@hawkbirdtree3660Ай бұрын
That’s a nice play on words😂
@FrostbearPlushiesАй бұрын
@@hawkbirdtree3660 really? I didn’t notice.
@chair772815 күн бұрын
@@FrostbearPlushies "revolves around pi"
@frayo05020 күн бұрын
This video almost get me an heart collapse
@davitdavid7165Ай бұрын
4:00 if a number is divisible by 9 the sum of its digits is also divisible by 9. When you divide by 2 over and over again you dont change the fact that the number ks dkvisible by 9. The fact that it is 9 instead of something like 18 is coinsidence, but there were few possibilities to begin with
@ry655427 күн бұрын
So is this just a base 10 thing or...?
@chair772815 күн бұрын
yea a lot of them are just because we coincidentally use base 10, but there are also a lot of similar things in other bases
@Lege19Ай бұрын
0:57 this is just wrong. It’s like saying if you role a dice six times you are guaranteed to role at least one six
@MissiFull29 күн бұрын
statistically*
@xian3themax31129 күн бұрын
It’s around a 99.9% chance which is easily rounded to 100%
@Lege1928 күн бұрын
@@xian3themax311 imo 99.9% is effectively the same as 100% in statistics, but in most other parts of maths they are very different. I’m not sure what branch this is (number theory?), but it’s not statistics
@pesaventofilippo18 күн бұрын
@@Lege19 No, it's very different also in statistics. If an event has a probability of 99.99% it is very likely to happen but maybe it doesn't happen. WIth 100%, it is guaranteed that the event happens, which is very different
@anonymanonymus47068 күн бұрын
Srinivasa Ramanujan took "magic square" personally.
@HectorProRobloxАй бұрын
Digital genius ur animation sound effect is satisfying it sounds like a chalk
@BruhzoАй бұрын
He finally posted again
@gswcooper7162Ай бұрын
The number 10^7.5 (or sqrt(10^15)) is almost exactly equal to the number of seconds in a leap-year; with the difference being just 6 minutes and 16 seconds (or an error of about 1 second per day).
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
congrat. you made me laugh with your "almost exactly equal". NB: in mathematics, "almost exactly equal" is "not equal". So your sentence is correct that way: The number 10^7.5 (or sqrt(10^15)) is not equal to the number of seconds in a leap-year. Interesting right ?
@rkidy5 күн бұрын
The strong law of small numbers: any given small number appears in far more contexts that seem unreasonable.
@1GMitzy4 күн бұрын
It's a shame videos online do a significantly better job at making me like math than my school
@writerightmathnation9481Ай бұрын
1:35 You said that the probability that six digits in a row are equal in the first thousand digits of pi is .1%, but I beg to differ. As you have demonstrated in this first few minutes, the probability of that happening is 100%, because it actually happens. I think what you intend to say is that if we consider a number whose digits are generated randomly, then the probability of getting six equal values in a row is approximately 0.1%. While don’t think that the notion of random is coherent, I will concede that it may make sense in probability calculations that the event of having six equal digits in a row in the first 1000 digits of a number, under the equally likely assumption, maybe as you claimed .1%; this is certainly very different from the claim that a number whose expansion we know through the first 1000 digits has a .1% probability of a certain string of digits in that first 1000 digits.
@user-mz2wb4lk4bАй бұрын
This looks a lot like Kuvina’s mathematical coincidences video. I’m guessing you saw it.
@matiasarancibia365Ай бұрын
It's good to see you on KZfaq again
@axbs4863Ай бұрын
the next digits of e are 45 90 and 45, the degrees in an isosceles right triangle, then 235, the first three primes, and 360, the amount of degrees in a circle
@ODA-258Ай бұрын
Bro I really don’t need this video re wiring my brain I have my math final tommorow 💀💀
@EnerJetixАй бұрын
0:29 37 was also recently talked about in Veritasium’s latest video. Tf is going on with that number?? Edit: There it is again at 1:45
@SciencedonerightАй бұрын
This is a case of selection bias. By these standards, the numbers 2 and 3 are hundreds of times more special than 37
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
37*3 = 111. that's why all "repeating digit" numbers are in some way related to 37. for exemple 111, 222, 333, 444, 555,..., 121212, 131313, 141414, ... 134513451345, ... are divisible by 37. I made the proof of why anumber in a form abccba is divisible by 37, with c = b + i and b = a + i with i being the offset (for exemple 123321 have an offset of 1, whereas 135531 have an offset of 2). these numbers divided by 37 are equal to a*3003 + i*330 with a being the lowest digit
@floutastic3511Ай бұрын
And this has 37 likes????
@samueljehannoАй бұрын
@@floutastic3511 Yeah the comment has 37 likes like what
@felixmathsАй бұрын
These numbers are of the form abccba = 100001a + 10010b + 1100c. In 123321, a=1, b=2 and c=3. 100001/37 gives remainder 27 10010/37 gives remainder 20 1100/37 gives remainder 27 abccba/37 gives remainder 27a + 20b + 27c = 27(a+c) + 20b When b is the median of a and c, this is = 27(a+c) + 20(a+c)/2 = 27(a+c) + 10(a+c) = 37(a+c) divisible by 37 But b on the keyboard is always in the middle of a and c, and is also always their median, so it always holds.
@batuhanbalaban404616 күн бұрын
It feels like Cartman explaining why Kyle is behind 9/11.
@Marcel-yu2fw29 күн бұрын
The ones where you sum up the digits of a number are NOT coincidences though. It's just the remainder modulo 9.
@peliqueirolaza09Ай бұрын
When digital genius posts I’m like poooog
@orispheraАй бұрын
4:15 The result is the original number mod 9 (assuming it's natural and a version of mod where 9 mod 9 is 9, but the usual numeral system is used). So, you can just 1*2 = 2 2*2 = 4 4*2 = 8 8*2 = 16 = 7 7*2 = 14 = 5 5*2 = 10 = 1 (all mod 9)
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
congrat you found what was behind this "coincidence". Now you can do that for everything he said in his video (except for the approximation, these are just scams)
@orispheraАй бұрын
@@midahe5548I remember making a separate comment about another one For the first one, I had some thoughts then, but I finally figured it out now. The second digit is the arithmetic mean of the other two. So, it's 111111(the second digit) ± (100001 - 1100)(the difference). Both are divisible by 37 (111111 = 91*1221 = 3003*37, 98901 = 81*1221 = 2673*37. In fact, all these numbers are divisible by 1221
@orispheraАй бұрын
I've re-watched and couldn't find anything I could have commented on. I guess I just mistook writing about the coincidence not in this video for that
@JKBDTS22 күн бұрын
4:00 Legit not surprising. If a number is divisible by 9, the sum of numbers is also divisible by 9 and it's not a coincidence.
@ayushrudra8600Ай бұрын
4:37 the number that is outputted is just the remaidner when 2^n is divided by 9
@SciencedonerightАй бұрын
These results are not surprising at all. If you all knew basic mathematics, you would obviously substitute π = e = 3 = 2 😂
@jaketinker903311 күн бұрын
Hating for no reason😭😭😭
@aguyontheinternet8436Ай бұрын
1:28 I don't really like using probability for the decimals of known numbers. Like no, the probability of getting the same digit 6 times in a row in the first 1000 digits of pi is 100%, not 0.1%. No matter how many times you bring up the digits of pi in base 10, it will always have those 6 9's in there in the exact same spot. You can say this is assuming the digits are random, but that isn't really fair, is it? The digits of pi aren't random, they're pretty much set in stone with formulas and infinite series. this was all very cool tho
@TriglycerideBewareАй бұрын
I agree, the probabilities presented are only true for random sequences. It's a faulty assumption
@staticchimera44Ай бұрын
@@TriglycerideBeware The idea is that it works off the assumption that the digits of pi really are random. If they aren't then it implies there has to be some reason as to why these digits are appearing in these kinds of interesting orders.
@TriglycerideBewareАй бұрын
@@staticchimera44 If you read my comment carefully, that assumption you said it relies on is _exactly_ what I was challenging...
@staticchimera44Ай бұрын
@@TriglycerideBeware Yes but as I said, if it is not random then it implies there is probably a reason for the strange appearance of numbers that we haven't found yet
@TriglycerideBewareАй бұрын
@@staticchimera44 I'm afraid I don't understand the point you're making. Could you say it a different way? Pi obviously isn't random--it's the same every time. The probabilities he gave were assuming that the first 1000 digits were selected randomly from a uniform discrete distribution of [0,9], and I think his script was pretty explicit about making that assumption. All I was saying was it doesn't make sense to assume the digits were generated randomly, since they aren't. I feel like we're mostly on the same page, but it sounds like you're trying to make an additional point. I would like to understand it, if you're okay with explaining it a different way
@futiled9304Ай бұрын
After a 3 month hiatus my man's finally back
@Thunder_rio18 күн бұрын
Frontbenchers :👁️👄👁️ Backbenchers :👄👁️👄
@Robloxgod-np3tpАй бұрын
3 and 7 are the main biblical numbers too…
@levismith4174Ай бұрын
Yeah it is
@stellastarfield1111Ай бұрын
Seeing this comment 7 days after it was posted
@felixmathsАй бұрын
These numbers are of the form abccba = 100001a + 10010b + 1100c. In 123321, a=1, b=2 and c=3.
I would argue that’s not coincidental. Mathematics was probed and researched for thousands of years before the Bible was written. The significance of certain numbers is far older than the Bible.
@roiproutiiАй бұрын
4:28 its juste powers of 2 mod 9, its not a coincidance
@DomR199724 күн бұрын
This is thoroughly enjoyable, but I'm sick and tired, so I don't think I'll be able to stay awake to finish it. I'll have to save it.
@asderoookrook7002Ай бұрын
На самом деле в квадрате Рамануджана нет ничего удивительного, если вы присмотритесь, то поймёте, что это обычный математический фокус
@kales901Ай бұрын
That 100% from 1:05 is wrong. There is no way there is a 100 percent chance, as that is always. You could make a number that doesn't follow this simpily: 1234567890 repeated 100 times.
@TriglycerideBewareАй бұрын
With continuous probability distributions, the probability of any individual event happening is infinitely small, so we say 0%, but still events happen anyway. So sometimes our intuition about what it means when something has 0% or 100% probability needs to be loosened, to not merely mean impossible/certain. ...that being said, selecting random digits is a discrete process... so I have no idea where the 100% came from either. Unless he's trying to say that pi *isn't* a random sequence, and it's always the same? But then so many of his other points are completely invalidated. Either way, there are quality issues.
@geekjokes8458Ай бұрын
@TriglycerideBeware it's not just continuous distributions, infintine number of things can sometimes be like that - we expect pi and some other trancendental numbers to be "normal", which means we think we should be able to find any finite string of digits somewhere in them with 100% probability i think there's a mistake in the video because he says "within the first 1000 digits" which is just not true...
@TunaBear6429 күн бұрын
4:37 Bravo, you discovered modular arithmetics
@user-fx5qv3ug6x14 күн бұрын
pie in cooking: 😊 πe in math: 😨
@provonic918723 күн бұрын
With numbers appearing in pi, is it really a chance probibility if its already set in place? We didnt create pi, we found it. Is it actually random if all the numbers were already there to behin with?
@funnyfish198224 күн бұрын
3:54 It's not weird, because if the sum of digits in a number is divisible by 9, then the number itself is divisible by 9. Same works for 3.
@funnyfish198224 күн бұрын
Hey, one more thing. Try experimenting with 1,1111... square. Look what happens.
@johnwolfenden7599Ай бұрын
But... it IS just a coincidence
@WildMatsuАй бұрын
Spend eight and a half minutes telling me you don't understand probability without telling me you don't understand probability
@Serega_BreghkoАй бұрын
For those, who want some statistic, probability chances, fun facts and explanations: 0:52 A little error: Statistically, theres should be 10 triple numbers on average in 1000 random digits, and the mistake was, that you counted up only 1 possible outcome, when theres 10: (000),(111),(222),(333)...(999). And the fact, that there are less than 10, is just a statistic. Also, there's NEVER a 100% on anything random with digits. Even infinite amount of random digits could consist of every number except of 1 specific, and the chances are 1×10 / Infinity. Which is not a 0, but still, very-very unlikely to ever happen. 1:28 By the statistic, we have 10 different outcomes, so we multiply the probability chance by 10 assuming, that probability of the next number to be the same - is 1/10. We get probability of "1/10,000" So, on average we get: 1000 digits of pi / 10,000 and we get a 1/10 chance of getting 6 equal digits in a row of 1000 random numbers. Not a 0.1% as mentioned in the video ;) 3:06 If you assume thay everything is random (e^pi - pi ~ 20; 2143/22 ~ pi⁴; pi⁴ + pi⁵ = e⁶; pi = √2 + √3; sin(60°) ~ e/pi; etc.) than it may look that chances of those coincidences are very slim, but, remember: 1) Math is a science, and constant at every point of space and time; 2) The ammount of different combinations with pi, e, sin, are almost endless; 3) Aldo, never forget, that those specific numbers are known, to be infinitely precise constants of universe, and have more in general, than other numbers based on what they represent. 4:00 There wont be any numbers, but instead, a fun fact: Amount of degreece can be ANY number that we want, but people have choosen 360° as a standart of circle, cuz this number can be divided by a LOT of numbers: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, (almost 16 "22.5"), 18, 20, 24, (almost 25 "14.4"), (almost 27 "13⅓"), 4:48 10! = 6 weeks; 4 weeks = 8! Heres an easier representation: 6 week (in seconds) = 6w × 7d × 24h × 60m × 60s 1h = 3600s 10! = 1 × (2×3) × (7) × (6×4) × (5×8×9×10) (5×8×9×10) = 40×9×10 = 360(circle😊) × 10 = 3600 3600 × (1×2×3×4) = 3600×24 = 79200 79200 × (6×7) 3628800 4 weeks (in minutes) = 4w × 7d × 24h × 60m 1d = 24h × 60m = 1440m 8! = 1 × 4 × 7 × (2×3×5×6×8) = 28 × (48 × 30) = 28 × 1440 = 40320 minutes
@taskfailedsuccesfully738Ай бұрын
Apparently there's a whole tool for finding approximations like the one in the video (RIES)
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
you are brave. My time in too precious for theses scammers
@Serega_BreghkoАй бұрын
@@midahe5548 Bro, i just have no life. When i woke up i immediately checked telegram, and saw 1 guy, that typed me, and as a result i bursted out laughing about series we watch, and made a fkn 7 THOUSAND symbols long story, which had almost the same plot as a series, and worked out with HIS life in the Internet.. on a mobile (those 2 comments are written fully on mobile too)
@Pizza-nl3pf22 сағат бұрын
math lore is crazy fr
@AbsoluteCatLover-ux6zl3 күн бұрын
It’s not a coincidence, it’s just fascinating. Math is a series of random numbers created by us humans that start out so simply but increase in complication the further you look into it. The randomness and repeated unexpectedness is truly amazing honestly and it’s crazy how many other coincidences there are out there that we still don’t know of. How did we ever even start out with numbers?
@WojtekXD-bx7jbАй бұрын
I'm a person who generally loves to collect random fun facts and then share them with my friends, I'm also a math nerd. To say I'm this video's targed audience would be an understatement
@Fire_AxusАй бұрын
your feelings are irrational
@allozovskyАй бұрын
3:40 It's no longer "around", The Avogadro number is *exactly* equal to 6.02214076·10²³ (since the 2019 redefinition of the mole).
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
it is still "around"
@allozovskyАй бұрын
The *dalton* (1⁄12 of the mass of a *¹²C* atom) is still "around" (that is determined experimentally and is known only with finite accuracy), but the Avogadro number from now on is fixed and is equal to an integer with 9 higher significant digits, the rest of them (lower 15 digits) being 0.
@pumpkin_pants382825 күн бұрын
if you listen to the voice he said "around 6.02 times 10 to the 23" so i think the "around" was referencing 6.02, and not the number on-screen
@allozovsky25 күн бұрын
@@pumpkin_pants3828Agree, that way it makes perfect sense. Though drawing the audience's attention to the fact that now it is an *exact* number would have served a much better purpose.
@Prosaicus14 күн бұрын
He said it was "around 6.02·10²³" because he omitted the last 6 decimal places. What makes this property of Avogadro's number such a big coincidence is how arbitrary its definition originally was. Avogadro's number was originally defined as the number of hydrogen atoms in one gram of hydrogen. A gram was originally defined as the mass of one cubic centimeter of water. And a centimeter was originally defined (during the French Revolution) as 10⁻⁹ times the distance from the North Pole to the Equator along the meridian passing through Paris.
@OrchidAlloyАй бұрын
some of these left me stunned
@bradyvenАй бұрын
You know you can find your Social Security number and the digit of pi
@Pablo360ableАй бұрын
The sum of digits stuff isn't really coincidental, though; that's just modulo 9* *caveat: taking it to be 9 if it would be 0
@sonicwaveinfinitymiddwelle8555Ай бұрын
This video is the definition of how easy it is to lie while using statistics
@_yohannАй бұрын
Dude woke up and said let's make them smarter...
@gregschinn6943Ай бұрын
For several of these relationships, I really wonder how someone actually figured them out, i.e. how they were motivated to find them.
@MariuszWoloszynАй бұрын
Cool but what’s the point?
@NonNonameАй бұрын
Math is developed by government and Illuminati! It's all connected 😱😱😱
@-Neko_77-Ай бұрын
Fun
@andrr2474Ай бұрын
There is no point, it's just fun
@torna2508Ай бұрын
That's the point There's none
@NopeNopeNope9124Ай бұрын
Do you ask yourself that a lot?
@ChaseWalkerofficial11 күн бұрын
For every like, I'll study one day
@costinraspberrypi8 күн бұрын
Like please
@RoronoaDPuneeth2 күн бұрын
What about dislike?
@tomduke55816 күн бұрын
I really like the Ramanujan square - i mean, not just because of the identical summing, and the hidden link to his BD, one easy approach for me is, for numbers 1-25 these are some of my fav piano concerto pieces of Mozart (to name a few, I listened frequently to No.9, 23, 24, and 25), and the years 86 - 89, is the periods 1786-1789 where he wrote most of his famous master pieces. for the sum 139, well I loved sym No.39 (in addition to No.41)
@wannacry6586Ай бұрын
8:25 if anyone wonders why basically if you extend e^x into the complex plane you get a rotation around (0|0) where x represents the angle The circumference of a unit circle is 2pi so a rotation by pi is equal to -1. Add one and you get zero
@kmjohnnyАй бұрын
That's a lot of stuff, but I don't really see what kind of pattern are we getting out of these. Although you did get my attention with the magic squares.
@Ham10285Ай бұрын
Sounds like he just messed around with a calculator
@puzzleticky8427Ай бұрын
POV: The Judge of Math accidentally put some things in order
@Tutmthetired4 сағат бұрын
math lore is crazy
@n0tlenny27 күн бұрын
Not only is each 6-digit number formed from rows, columns, and diagonals on a calculator keyboard divisible by 37, but they're also all divisible by 1. Amazing!
@user-qd4gz1rn3tАй бұрын
magic squares also have the "property of constant differences"
@binh5806Ай бұрын
0:28 I think 37 REALLY is the most random yet popular number.
@fouriousbanana696622 күн бұрын
this was a rollercoaster ride and a half
@LeviathanTheGreat88Ай бұрын
1:00 this guy is really making a fool of himself saying that there is a 100% chance
@midahe5548Ай бұрын
I mean, he is making a fool of himself with everything he said in that video
@azysgaming8410Ай бұрын
@@midahe5548 lol yea he sounds like a conspiracy theorist when most results are probably coincidences.
@GrammulkaАй бұрын
5:10 look what I found for 4 digit numbers: 1420^3+5170^3+1000^3 = 142,051,701,000 2 digits have several solutions as well, like: 16^3+50^3+33^3 = 165033 22^3+18^3+59^3 = 221859 34^3+10^3+67^3 = 341067 44^3+46^3+64^3 = 444664 48^3+72^3+15^3 = 487215 98^3+28^3+27^3 = 982827 98^3+32^3+21^3 = 983221 After that I checked for two 3-digit numbers and 2nd powers, and found only this: 990^2+100^2 = 990100 But I guess these results are not that beautiful because of how we group digits in triples. I'll look for other powers then.
@studyonly7888Ай бұрын
Bro … u ok?
@GrammulkaАй бұрын
@@studyonly7888 yeah, I'm fine. At the moment I'm searching for 12-digit numbers. The closest I got was 531^4+174^4+170^4+819^4=531,174,170,818. One off =(
@mymo_in_BbАй бұрын
It's notable how many of these are just the results of us evolving ten fingers
@btf_flotsam47821 күн бұрын
The first one becomes a lot less mysterious when you realize that 111=3×37 and that they are all divisible by 111.
@bruhthing101028 күн бұрын
bro the beginning having 37 is crazzyyy
@user-ps2tc6pf9b24 күн бұрын
The most useful video I ever seen about math. Especially (1³+2³+3³+4³+...+n³) = (1+2+3+4+...+n)²
@Morbius_OfficialАй бұрын
Hitler when his plan fails: 1:24
@danamaderas33826 күн бұрын
🇩🇪🥨🍺
@umatiwari9889Ай бұрын
Everytime i pop with a number theory coincidence on my own especially primes,feels like i finally cracked the RH😂
@Shaeffen_Күн бұрын
There needs to be an april fools version of this video where everything is kust not true
@vixguyАй бұрын
its like flipping a coin 100 times and saying "I am so lucky! The probability of that sequence happening is 1/2^100
@lelaleaslАй бұрын
now i wonder what can be done in other numerical bases
@MarshiDev25 күн бұрын
This is why you have to watch out when extrapolating patterns
@ujkloin5 сағат бұрын
3:56 This one i know for sure is not a coincidence. You can take the sum of every multipile of 9, and it will always be 9. If it isnt, keep summing until you have one digit, and that digit will always be nine. The same thing works here, all the way from 1440 its 9, and 5.625 is 18, which can be summed to 9. This will always be the case. Also im pretty sure many more of these arent coincidences, so im not trying to sound smart here, its just some information. Also i figured this out while eating streetfood.
@Feashis29 күн бұрын
This convinces me that everything is a simulation
@samwortham238517 күн бұрын
That first one is just because they're all divisible by 111. Not very surprising imo
@Gunner9823 күн бұрын
I was watching the video as this thought randomly crossed my mind. It's crazy to think that trying to find all digits of π is literally like trying to explore the entirety of space.
@grismor874013 күн бұрын
The first one is not a coincidence. They are all divisible by 111 (which equals 37*3), which is much more obviously connected to what you're doing.