The background sound is very disturbing otherwise the playlist is gold mine. Thanks sir.

very nicely explained lecture

underrated content , thankyou sir❤

The best and the most detailed Linear Algebra playlist! How many videos we will have? And will we cover isomorphism etc.? Thanks for your effort, I can't wait to review my linear algebra with this unique playlist!

Aside from the math, what amazes me the most is rhay you're writing mirrorred. And naturally. Damn

Just came across this channel. Very nice explanation of cuts!

Thanks for the video 😊

Thanks for video Sir but why we limited us with alpha and beta greater than 0*? Didn't we define show that multiplication of real numbers are closed?

Crystal Clear! Thanks for the video!

Awesome video. Thanks!

Wow. I never saw that derivation before. Really nice. I get chills when I see evidence that math is a seamless whole, if you know what I mean.

Thanks

Thanks! I was looking for a proof like this. Do you have any references or sources? I am currently working on my master's thesis and would like to cite a proof like this.

Sir, how can U dot V can be equal to u transpose times v. left side is a scalar and right side is a 1x1 matrix. We can multiply left side by a 2x2 matrix but we cant multiply right side by a 2x2 matrix. So, we can easily see that 1x1 matrices are not scalars. Aren't we?

Shouldn't the Col(A^TA) be equal to the Col(A^T) instead?

Thank you very much sir. Well explained, I have been watching different videos on KZfaq but this one did the trick👍

New Linear Algebra video. Thanks!

Excellent

I was with you all the way through “Hello students…“ 😅

Sir, thak you for your work. But I cant understand the notation of addition that u used in this video. alpha and beta are sets. So how do we add them? What does this addition mean?

What textbook is used for this class?

Thank you sir❤

thank you,Mike teacher.

Nice explanation

Thank you for uploading this equation! This was very informative and was a clear presentation of how to determine this on larger matrices.

0:18 fejer kernel. Heatkernel

But how do you determine the probability of bull average and bear?

5:41 cauchy euler

8:02 e itheta

2:16 trigonometric polinomials

3:37

I think the iid assumption can be relaxed to just being jointly independent.

Thank you prof Mike, your analysis and linear algebra lectures are wonderful

Always good to go higher. Excelsior! 🎉😊

Mike is indeed our mathematician! 🎉😊

well done sir👏

Thank you so much! It really makes sense now

Sir , how to find the mean and variance of the above f(x)

Great explanation

Well done job

This is a great video, but I am confused about how you are writing it! Are you writing it from right to left?

Can u make Laplace equation in polar coordinates for three dimension??

can you also do about pcl(principal component analysis ) and the concept of distance please

Where was this when i was in calc 4 😢

Awesome bro! May I ask you what happens if we put M - N?

Thanks for videos Sir. I newly saw your channel and it is amazing. Can you write the name of the books that you are following for that playlist to description of playlist. Which book do you use for linear algebra?

So why haven't mathematicians APPLIED this inequality to Archimedes' n-gon approach? If Isoperimetric Inequality is true, it is IMPOSSIBLE to converge to a perfect circle from a non-. Mathematicians have yet to apply what this inequality tells us about circle vs. non- comparisons.

Hi isn't it easier to compute the matrix by seeing that if you divide it into 2x2 blocks, each of these blocks embed in a 2 dimensional algebra a + b.e where e² =1. This algebra is commutative. So the determinant of the original matrix corresponds to: (a +b.e)² - (c +d.e)² = (a + c + (b+d).e)(a - c + (b-d).e) Now, the determinant now corresponds to the determinant of this product (by reembedding it into the matrix algebra) which is much easier to do, and to factorize.

You really need to slow down your speech. Or, more importantly, PAUSE between concepts so listeners have the opportunity to process what you say.

Apply this to Archimedes' 3rd postulate in his 'CIRCVLI DIMENSIO' P > c > p for circumscribed n-gon perimeter P & insc. n-gon perimeter p & circle circ. c. If isoperimetric inequality is true, Archimedes' 3rd postulate is unsound. In fact, all non-circular approaches are unsound due to the inequality. To solve for π while/as preserving isoperimetric equality, you have to treat each π/4 as n = 1 such that n = 4... not n → ∞. Do this by rolling the unit diameter circle on a flat plane surface y = -1/2 & use algebra to find the linear distance its origin travels per π/4. Hint: if you expand a second circle from the first by an areal factor of π/4 per rotation, you will end with a surrounding annulus of area π. Use the width of this annulus w & its orthogonality to π/4 length to construct a right triangle sides w, π/4 bounded by a hypotenuse of 2r = 1. pdfhost.io/edit?doc=7507a819-627f-4eee-beaa-441e685e5157