I remember watching ”The Story of Maths” back in 2012 when I was 15 which got me into mathematics and then theoretical physics. Marcus du Sautoy presented that documentary and it had a profound impact on me

On the other hand, many people say the journey is more important than arriving at the destination. Rote learning doesn't lead to robust understanding. Deriving the shortcuts, for example by playing with examples to see a pattern, is a valuable exercise.

I love that we're back to the institute. Zoom just doesn't do it for me.

My math teacher always described it as maths being "All about finding easy ways to do hard things" and that really resonated with me as a kid and fueled my interest in the subject for a long time

I ❤ Marcus du Sautoy. Never having followed a career path in mathematics myself, I find myself thinking profoundly differently having listened to him speak. Marcus is such a good and enthusiastic communicator, light bulbs switch on inside my head with every word he speaks. I see the beauty and the wonder of seemingly disconnected areas of everyday life being united logically and with utter elegance. Thank you Marcus. Not sure if it is the beauty of maths solutions, Marcus' enthusiasm or both; either way, I'm a big fan.

About the honeybees - they don't actually make hexagonal honeycomb - they make circles and the heat of their movements and physics turns them into hexagons *because* it's the most efficient shape :D

Such a great speaker, so much wonderful stuff from the RI this year so far.

Absolutely in love with his sweater. Great talk too!!

Finally, live lectures. I've waited them sooo long

Thank you. I enjoyed that. Even if I did click the thumbnail because I thought it was a Matt Parker video....sorry about that!

Amazing. Just absolutely lovely, this lecture. Thank you Mr. duSatoy!!

Nothing comparable to live lectures. Overjoyed to have them back - this is already shaping up to be a great year of learning, RI.

What a nice room to do something like this in.

I really look forward to watching new RI talks and I am never disappointed. Thank you.

It's a world of laughter and a world of tears it's a world of hopes and a world of fears there's so much that we share that is time we're aware it's a SMALL WORLD after all

Gorgeous presentation, thx.

Thanks you so much for knowing/understanding and _mentioning_ that there are ways to rewire in a very short period of time @48:00 as we have come very far from the past years of talk therapy and nothing to show for it.

LOL at the “8 out of 10 cats” thing. I’ve seen videos here on KZfaq of the British comedy shows “8 out of 10 Cats” and its derivative, “8 out of 10 Cats does Countdown.” But since I live in a country where neither of those shows, nor the ad that inspired them, are actually aired, this is my first time to see the inspiration for their titles.

Good presentation, I like how he shows all the ways maths can have practical applications even without doing math directly

Great talk! I would rather do mathematics than sudoku anytime! It is not only much more interesting but it also increases your brain power.

*Thank you.* 🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹

My math teachers were actually very opposed to shortcuts! The kept reiterating the importance of showing all the steps

No words, just brilliant teaching

Wonderful, very enthusiastic. thanks for sharing.

24:50 - diagram/movie/story to expose more easily important aspects of complex multi-systems. Speaks to the range of the human ability to form a specific understanding from a range of sequenced notions. The process is in our heads is sequential, but each step can hold understanding from only several notions. If a human is exposed to a story (a diagram may contain very few and sometime only one story/narrative), the story form is much more compliant to be formed to a single consideration step/s. I commend you for pointing out this notion with respect to passing information (as a shortcut ?! :)).

PLEASE make a post on the relation between DIV GRAD at finite density charge sources and the relation of this to gravitational curvature for finite density mass distributions. For zero charge density DIV GRAD X=0, while for mass the mass on a rubber sheet model suggests negative (Gaussian) curvature in the surrounding vacuum, suggesting DIV g

This is true. I was studying Logic just the definition and thinking about it; Negation, Conjunction, Disjunction, Biconditional and I just start to listen better what people says you can discover many lies. Mistakes people made trying to defend their arguments truly fascinating.

Thanks very much for your program and for sharing it. Maths are fun with you ! 😊

I just saw Contagion for the first time the other day lol. Not only that but I studied behavioral science 🤣 thank you.

Thanks

16:50 - how many unknown boxes you need to open to tell you something meaningful about the boxes should not be compared to: "a human taking the plunge into an unknown situation". You CANNOT assume people enter any situation with any intent. In fact it seems we are only allowed to observe life with relevance to our intent. Meaning: 1. A person might not notice certain boxes 2. Any box that contain relevance to a more important intention of the person than the one of curiosity to open the box, Will change the other boxes preference rules. For "buying a product" process, and within each step of a single product review, I agree that the question "is this the right choice with regard to better unseen options?" - is important to deal with. And promotes investigation to the notion of "sufficiency categories and dynamics". For involving "e": You must frame the same question for a "learning algorithm" trained for one intention. So, if you hold only one intent "to find a specific X in a box", and the option boxes were set either with or without X, and without a single consideration that connects a certain box with X, then "e" can be used.

Inverse networking. Given that we use networking all the time, sometimes we need to escape that for a solution.

I just ordered the book! I made one critical observation, however. The part of the presentation about the Cello is perhaps, a bad example. I choose to believe this was meant to be more of an analogy, and like all analogies they fail if you carry them too far. The issue I take with it is that it seems to mis-identify the actual problem, or rather, it is does identify it but doesn't follow through. The actual problem identified is the time it takes to program muscle memory into the nervous system. That problem does seem to have shortcuts. One such shortcut is to temporarily increase the neuroplasticity of the brain. A US based neuroscientist, Dr. Andrew Huberman has done research along these lines and has found intriguing possibilities from altering the schedule of when to learn something in relation to when one goes to sleep, to certain pharmaceuticals/chemicals that can aid in skill acquisition. Oddly, despite the negative health consequences, nicotine appears to be one such substance. What I find extremely interesting here is that "Identifying the problem to solve." is generally what prevents people from being able to apply shortcuts. Because if this identification issue, shortcuts often fail to achieve the desired effect and often have the opposite effect of making the problems seemingly unsolvable. The result is, in western culture, we teach people to avoid shortcuts as a moral principle, when really, we have failed to teach how to identify problems properly. If it were my lecture, I would leave the Cello Example in, but elaborate upon it as an example of an "Identification" problem.

4:11 - isn't it "Poiesis" i.e. without the "r"?

All right. Somebody please help me here. The shortcut described from about 18:00 on. Consider about 37% of possibilities, then select the next one that beats all the numbers seen so far. If the top one is already in the first 37%, you will never get to pick an option that beats everything in the first 37%, so you will never make a selection according to this rule.

His sweater made me click in. Made me think the once-I-thought-dull math might be interesting and cheering and let me listen to him.

muy wena la expocision de lo exagonal y su uso mas matematico en la preservacion por la temperatura 😊exelente la tesis

Ri, you have good content, but I have one important word for you: DE-ESS. A low pass filter that curs down on sibilance, the overbearing loudness of the letters S, T, F, SH. With those mic's you use, it sometimes drives me nuts...

8:15 Gaudi did something similar for his design of Sagrada Familia using upside down catenaries.

6:00 watch Matt Parker's video about beehives and hexagons, in 3D it's not actually the most optimal shape in costs of wax relative to volume, but it's still close

The kicker is that Gauss claimed he actually performed the addition taking the long way, so they say, by adding up all 100 numbers.

shortcut for myself is less talk and get to the answer, most probable this is how all professors work. I got bored and anxious waiting for solution's. my problem to deal with, I understand this.

genious!! again

3:33 Luckily he found a shortcut and could finish the talk in one hour instead of a few years.

I remember my math teacher in high school said "Mathematicians are the laziest people on Earth. They'd rather spend 30 minutes thinking just to reduce the time spent on calculations by 5 minutes."

That's amazing

It's "Praxis and poiesis". (Poiesis without an 'r') :)

Awesome information, thank you so much!

Just my 2 cents here but the correct spelling is "poiesis" (Poïésis)... and It's from Aristotle... Hello from France! ... back to the video.

On the topic of limits for the y-axis (30:08) is there a rule of thumb about the limits? Like: Should they alwas start at 0? Or at 50% of the smallest value? etc

I think you meant to talk about Nature's harmonious properties rather than "Lazy". Or "Nature seems lazy" when the handling of a change in one system propagates to other systems faster than it propagates within the system space. And when the propagation to other system is slower, it seems nature is a hard worker. BTW I hate the word "lazy", because if a person is lazy about one thing - it naturally means he is a hard worker about another thing. All "lazy" examples show a person handling irrelevant intentions to the a task deemed important by social aspects, those aspects disregard the existence of more than one influencing intention on a person.

After from the introductory story about Gauss, there is very little maths here.

Very interesting, even for a layman like me. Thanks

we don't need mathematicians to find the shortcuts , computer algorithms can do the job .

Hooked on Phonics? Have some Allen Turing! The perfect compliment for the phonically cultured mind.

The pullover is like Freddy Krueger would have :-)

does anyone remember the documentary Marcus did about consciousness, where he did the "select a picture" test inside an MRA scanner?? trying to find a copy

I'll be honest: your cat wasn't asked because they're just not influencer material. That's harsh, I know, but true.

Fantastic!

Number are everything to be add to the lost civilization.

This Aristotle thing IMHO isn't 'proeisis' but 'poiesis' (the origin of our word 'poetry'...

If only my math teacher had taught us the shortcuts, If have enjoyed the subject. Instead, I struggled. It was only as an adult that, when I discovered shortcuts, that I finally learned to love math.

Your lecture proves scientists are most unscientific with analogies.

I mean, the fact that Gauss's brain is missing... this is not a minor mishap: its the start of a science fiction movie!

Fantastic 👌

Sofar the best way to used A.I.

Wow!

Traveling salesman, try a nearly straight line, forming a spiral... of course proving it is the challenge ... skipping the nearest city is the hard part.

Conservation of energy is why hexagonal structures are found in nature. The Electromagnetic field governs the entropy of all matter. Technically it's not a hexagon, but it looks that way due to higher dimensional boundaries.

The Gaus anecdote at the start, I was already starting to think about working backwards and Marcus proposed the million hypothetical I thought well no counting needed, that answer is just going to have X more zeros, 50, 005, 000?

Here I am, a random person actually watching from Sacramento.

22:00

Lazy plus highIQ =>Th8nkOf Shortcut which is just another word for algorithm. SC=ALGORITHM!

I thought it was called a brachistochrone curve?

So what value is there in knowing the answer is 5050

Am I missing something or does Koengsberg (sp?) only have six bridges now, as the presenter spoke of the seven modern day bridges?

Wait, you could actually win $1kk if you know math well enough?? Take that people that said you can't get rich through math. I'm starting to learn math for sure!

brachistochrone curveat 12:16

This “Short Cut” topic on balance is a stretch. I’d find him engaging as a professor, but I’m not inclined to read the book.

I think the Gauss story sells Gauss a bit short. He was both a maths genius and a mental prodigy. There is a much more obvious solution to the problem and I think both would have occurred to Gauss. I think he described to his teacher the most eloquent solution. I think any mathematician will find the other solution with a little thought. But there is no incentive to do so. I found it purely by accident, in fact in my sleep.

The slide at 8:57 gets a whole new meaning in Spring 2022. The talk was filmed in November 2021, so this cannot be an easter egg.

4:16, poiesis, not proeisis.

Being a lazy individual I have always looked for the most efficient way of doing anything. Comes second nature to me. 🤣

I would love to learn how to prove math theorems, but math is so hard for me🤷🏻‍♂️

A lot of criticism here regarding style, but I don't think you can describe this as boring. As for the book I haven't read it but I suspect those critical of his popularising a subject that needs it desperately haven't either.

I’m glad my math teacher wasn’t like him.

Not sure that causing an avalanche is the most laudable way of getting down a mountain. .

He has miscalculated the cat population sample size for the given specifications. For a cat population size of 7,000,000, in order to achieve results within a 5% margin of error with 95% confidence (19 out of 20 times), you need 385 cats in your sample, not 246.

Shortcuts are fun! Take Wimbledon... how many matches does it have in the regular male singles tournament? It has 128 participants, right? Well, each game produces 1 winner and 1 loser. At the end, after the final, we have 1 winner and 127 losers... so there must be 127 matches. Nice and easy!

What is it about mathematicians and stripy jumpers?

❤️

1/e=36.7879%

Mike Ermentraut from Breaking Bad?

How many child are there waiting for that lightbulb to be shifted ON?

Cool

100*(100+1)/2

I came up with 5000 in less than a minute. Let me think about the extra 50 using 50 x 100. I am going to ask someone to tell me where the extra 50 comes from. Just in case . I will check back in a day or two. Never mind I got it.

Is "Proiesis" meant to be poiesis?

.

Intoxicating short cuts are, and math is awesome to a fault. The understanding of cause should be described mathematically, but modern physics has this backward. They will hastily describe something with math and derive cause from that math. An analogous math description is not understanding, but it becomes a permanent feature in a crowd, and we are stuck with it forever. The scientific method does not care about that, because it prefers constant over causality.