Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Euler's formula is not a formula. An MIT professor spent a whole lecture proving it is a definition, not a discovery. This is 18.03, Lecture 6, Arthur Mattuck. Free on MIT OpenCourseWare. The formula is e^(iθ) = cos θ + i sin θ. Most people memorize it and move... on. Mattuck refused to. He asked one thing. What gives that the right to be called an exponential at all? An exponential has to obey one law: e^a · e^b = e^(a+b). So he checked it. He multiplied e^(iθ₁) by e^(iθ₂), expanded the sines and cosines, and looked at what fell out. The angle-addition identities. cos(A+B) and sin(A+B), the two formulas you were forced to memorize in school. They were never two formulas. They are one line: e^(iθ) obeying the law of exponents. Then the payoff. An integral that normally needs integration by parts twice and a trick, ∫ e^(-x) cos x dx, drops out in a few lines once you let the numbers go complex. Nothing is easier to integrate than an exponential. Someone once asked him what beauty in math looks like. He pointed at the board. Something long became something short, and lost nothing.show more

Dominique

1,254 subscribers

88,198 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Most people first see Euler’s Formula as a strange equation in a textbook. Then years later, they realize it quietly powers the modern world. Leonhard Euler discovered that these seemingly unrelated mathematical ideas: → exponential growth → imaginary numbers → sine waves → cosine waves → rotation … are all deeply connected through one identity: e^(iθ) = cos(θ) + i·sin(θ) At first glance it looks impossible. How can an exponential function suddenly produce circles and waves? The key insight is that multiplying by a complex exponential creates rotation. As the angle θ changes: - the cosine term tracks horizontal motion - the sine term tracks vertical motion - together they trace a perfect circle in the complex plane Euler showed that waves and rotation are mathematically the same phenomenon viewed differently. That single idea changed science and engineering forever. Today, Euler’s Formula sits underneath: → Fourier Transforms → signal processing → wireless communication → MRI scanners → quantum mechanics → electrical engineering → audio compression → radar systems → GPS → neural network frequency analysis Even modern AI systems indirectly rely on mathematics built on top of these foundations. The famous special case is Euler’s Identity: e^(iπ) + 1 = 0 Richard Feynman reportedly called it: "our jewel." Because it revealed that mathematics is not a collection of separate topics. It is one connected language describing reality itself.

Most people first see Euler’s Formula as a strange equation in a textbook. Then years later, they realize it quietly powers the modern world. Leonhard Euler discovered that these seemingly unrelated mathematical ideas: → exponential growth → imaginary numbers → sine waves → cosine waves → rotation … are all deeply connected through one identity: e^(iθ) = cos(θ) + i·sin(θ) At first glance it looks impossible. How can an exponential function suddenly produce circles and waves? The key insight is that multiplying by a complex exponential creates rotation. As the angle θ changes: - the cosine term tracks horizontal motion - the sine term tracks vertical motion - together they trace a perfect circle in the complex plane Euler showed that waves and rotation are mathematically the same phenomenon viewed differently. That single idea changed science and engineering forever. Today, Euler’s Formula sits underneath: → Fourier Transforms → signal processing → wireless communication → MRI scanners → quantum mechanics → electrical engineering → audio compression → radar systems → GPS → neural network frequency analysis Even modern AI systems indirectly rely on mathematics built on top of these foundations. The famous special case is Euler’s Identity: e^(iπ) + 1 = 0 Richard Feynman reportedly called it: "our jewel." Because it revealed that mathematics is not a collection of separate topics. It is one connected language describing reality itself.

Tech with Mak

25,504 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

An MIT professor explained the one idea funds pay $500K for, and he does it in the first hour of freshman calculus. MIT put the whole lecture online. it has been free for twenty years. almost nobody finishes it. his point: calculus is not a hundred formulas to memorize. it is one idea. take two points on a curve, slide them together until the gap vanishes, and the slope you are left with is the derivative. everything else is just consequences. he is David Jerison, and his 18.01 lectures have taught more people calculus than any room on earth. skip to the board, where the power rule, the product rule, the chain rule, the fifty things you were forced to memorize, all fall out of that one limit. no formula sheet. no tricks. one definition, reused. that same slope is velocity. it is marginal cost. it is the gradient that trains a neural network. one operation, hiding everywhere something moves. the math is free. what nobody can sell you is the patience to understand the one limit instead of cramming the fifty formulas that fall out of it. that hour is the foundation, and it is the only part that ever pays.

An MIT professor explained the one idea funds pay $500K for, and he does it in the first hour of freshman calculus. MIT put the whole lecture online. it has been free for twenty years. almost nobody finishes it. his point: calculus is not a hundred formulas to memorize. it is one idea. take two points on a curve, slide them together until the gap vanishes, and the slope you are left with is the derivative. everything else is just consequences. he is David Jerison, and his 18.01 lectures have taught more people calculus than any room on earth. skip to the board, where the power rule, the product rule, the chain rule, the fifty things you were forced to memorize, all fall out of that one limit. no formula sheet. no tricks. one definition, reused. that same slope is velocity. it is marginal cost. it is the gradient that trains a neural network. one operation, hiding everywhere something moves. the math is free. what nobody can sell you is the patience to understand the one limit instead of cramming the fifty formulas that fall out of it. that hour is the foundation, and it is the only part that ever pays.

Loran

1,078,694 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Ten million people have watched an MIT professor teach a course whose first lecture is literally titled "What is a Derivative?" Almost none have written down the two-line answer. He filmed the lecture once in the fall of 2007 and it has been on YouTube ever since. Math tutors charge $200 an hour to teach a diluted version of what he covered in 50 minutes for free. His name is David Jerison. He is a professor of mathematics at MIT and the instructor of 18.01 Single Variable Calculus, one of the most-watched math courses in the history of the internet. The 50-minute clip in this video is Lecture 1, filmed at MIT in the fall of 2007. Jerison is deriving the definition of a derivative from a single tangent line. The whole framework fits on a napkin. A derivative is just how much y changes when x moves a tiny bit. Draw a tangent line to any curve at any point. The slope of that line is the derivative. Memorize one formula, the power rule, and you can differentiate every polynomial on earth in your head. Chain that with a handful of exceptions and you can differentiate almost every function humanity has ever written down. That single set of rules is what every neural network runs on gradient descent, what every rocket landing at SpaceX solves in real time, and what every options desk at Goldman Sachs is running behind every quote you see on the screen. "In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them." That is John von Neumann, the mathematician who helped design the atomic bomb and invent the modern computer. Jerison returns to the same idea in every lecture. Almost no student giving up on calculus has heard von Neumann say it out loud. Every quant fund on Wall Street pays entry-level analysts $250,000 to know the same power rule Jerison derives on the board. Every AI bootcamp charges tens of thousands to teach a diluted version of the same equation on a laptop. The lecture is free on MIT OpenCourseWare. The textbook is under sixty dollars. Almost none of the millions who watched have ever taken the power rule and applied it to their own numbers on their own paper. The math is free. The willingness to actually take one derivative before your next model, trade, or engineering trade-off is the entire edge.

Ten million people have watched an MIT professor teach a course whose first lecture is literally titled "What is a Derivative?" Almost none have written down the two-line answer. He filmed the lecture once in the fall of 2007 and it has been on YouTube ever since. Math tutors charge $200 an hour to teach a diluted version of what he covered in 50 minutes for free. His name is David Jerison. He is a professor of mathematics at MIT and the instructor of 18.01 Single Variable Calculus, one of the most-watched math courses in the history of the internet. The 50-minute clip in this video is Lecture 1, filmed at MIT in the fall of 2007. Jerison is deriving the definition of a derivative from a single tangent line. The whole framework fits on a napkin. A derivative is just how much y changes when x moves a tiny bit. Draw a tangent line to any curve at any point. The slope of that line is the derivative. Memorize one formula, the power rule, and you can differentiate every polynomial on earth in your head. Chain that with a handful of exceptions and you can differentiate almost every function humanity has ever written down. That single set of rules is what every neural network runs on gradient descent, what every rocket landing at SpaceX solves in real time, and what every options desk at Goldman Sachs is running behind every quote you see on the screen. "In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them." That is John von Neumann, the mathematician who helped design the atomic bomb and invent the modern computer. Jerison returns to the same idea in every lecture. Almost no student giving up on calculus has heard von Neumann say it out loud. Every quant fund on Wall Street pays entry-level analysts $250,000 to know the same power rule Jerison derives on the board. Every AI bootcamp charges tens of thousands to teach a diluted version of the same equation on a laptop. The lecture is free on MIT OpenCourseWare. The textbook is under sixty dollars. Almost none of the millions who watched have ever taken the power rule and applied it to their own numbers on their own paper. The math is free. The willingness to actually take one derivative before your next model, trade, or engineering trade-off is the entire edge.

Lumen

24,218 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

FEMA who? H-E-B is on the way! Did you know H-E-B was founded right in Kerrville, Texas? And now, they're coming to the rescue with disaster relief trucks to support the Kerrville community. Seriously love living in Texas and that we always take care of our own. Thank you, H-E-B, for being there when we need you most Help is on the way! For those of you who don’t know, H-E-B is a grocery store chain in Texas and an excellent one at that. You go H-E-B! Texas Strong! 🇺🇸💪

FEMA who? H-E-B is on the way! Did you know H-E-B was founded right in Kerrville, Texas? And now, they're coming to the rescue with disaster relief trucks to support the Kerrville community. Seriously love living in Texas and that we always take care of our own. Thank you, H-E-B, for being there when we need you most Help is on the way! For those of you who don’t know, H-E-B is a grocery store chain in Texas and an excellent one at that. You go H-E-B! Texas Strong! 🇺🇸💪

👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈

501,340 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

You passed physics in school. A former NASA fellow says that means nothing. You memorized the formulas and never understood a single one. His proof is the most famous equation on Earth. F equals ma. You have written it a hundred times. And he says you have been reading it backwards your whole life. It should be a equals F over m. Not force equals mass times acceleration, but acceleration is caused by a force. One is a string of symbols to memorize. The other tells you what actually happens in the universe: push something, it moves. Cause, then effect. Flip that one idea and equations you hated in school start to breathe. V equals IR becomes current is driven by voltage. Even E equals mc squared stops being trivia and becomes the sentence that told Einstein what mass really is. The comments are full of people admitting the same quiet thing. Aced physics in high school. Got to university. Realized they never understood any of it. One writes that in his country, the moment you try to actually understand physics, your grades drop, because school only rewards cramming. You were not taught physics. You were taught to pass a test and forget it. This is the video that shows the difference.

You passed physics in school. A former NASA fellow says that means nothing. You memorized the formulas and never understood a single one. His proof is the most famous equation on Earth. F equals ma. You have written it a hundred times. And he says you have been reading it backwards your whole life. It should be a equals F over m. Not force equals mass times acceleration, but acceleration is caused by a force. One is a string of symbols to memorize. The other tells you what actually happens in the universe: push something, it moves. Cause, then effect. Flip that one idea and equations you hated in school start to breathe. V equals IR becomes current is driven by voltage. Even E equals mc squared stops being trivia and becomes the sentence that told Einstein what mass really is. The comments are full of people admitting the same quiet thing. Aced physics in high school. Got to university. Realized they never understood any of it. One writes that in his country, the moment you try to actually understand physics, your grades drop, because school only rewards cramming. You were not taught physics. You were taught to pass a test and forget it. This is the video that shows the difference.

ooaes

40,211 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

A pilot put a passenger jet down on a river and got every person on board off alive. Within days, investigators were asking him what he had eaten for lunch. He told them a tuna sandwich. Then they asked whether he had had a candy bar. Whether he had had a soda. That is not small talk. There is a precise reason those 2 questions could have ended his career, and Tom Hanks lays it out in about 4 sentences. The pilot is Chesley Sullenberger. Hanks played him, spent time with him first, and says the man walked him through the entire script telling him which parts never happened. As Hanks was told it, the stake was money. If the board could establish that the pilot did 1 thing wrong, the insurance on an airplane he puts at 17 million dollars would not have to be paid out. Every question in that room was built for that. It went on for the better part of a year. In the film it takes days, because films cannot afford a year. What was happening to him has a name in psychology. Baruch Fischhoff described it in 1975 and called it creeping determinism. Once you know how something ended, the ending looks like it was always coming, and every road you did not take looks like it was sitting right there, clearly marked, the whole time. Which is why the question "why did you not do this instead" is close to unanswerable. It is asked by people who know the ending, to a person who did not have it. There is a second effect underneath, well documented in aviation and in medicine. The person at the centre of the investigation frequently comes out of it in worse condition than the people he saved. Researchers gave that person a name. He is the second victim. Hanks is 67 when he says this, and what he admires is not the landing. It is a distinction he makes in 1 sentence near the end, and it is the whole reason he told the story at all. He saved everyone on that plane. Then he spent a year proving he had not eaten a candy bar.

Stefan.

210,938 Aufrufe • vor 18 Tagen

An MIT professor fired a gun in a lecture hall to teach students one formula. The recording is online. The topic sounds boring on paper: velocity and acceleration. Then he pulls out a rifle. He wants the speed of a bullet. No modern sensors, just two wires and a timer. He makes the room do the math first, counts down from three and shoots. The number on the screen settles it. After that he brings up Sherlock Holmes. A scene where a man falls on a marble floor and Holmes announces the skull is crushed. The professor explains why that moment is flawless physics, and why a bald head made it worse. You will never watch that scene the same way. There are also eggs and a tomato. They do not survive. Same physics as the skull. One gunshot, one detective, one dead tomato. All in the video.

An MIT professor fired a gun in a lecture hall to teach students one formula. The recording is online. The topic sounds boring on paper: velocity and acceleration. Then he pulls out a rifle. He wants the speed of a bullet. No modern sensors, just two wires and a timer. He makes the room do the math first, counts down from three and shoots. The number on the screen settles it. After that he brings up Sherlock Holmes. A scene where a man falls on a marble floor and Holmes announces the skull is crushed. The professor explains why that moment is flawless physics, and why a bald head made it worse. You will never watch that scene the same way. There are also eggs and a tomato. They do not survive. Same physics as the skull. One gunshot, one detective, one dead tomato. All in the video.

ooaes

47,612 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Lots of folks wondering why the two plays to Oneil Cruz in the Pittsburgh Pirates at New York Mets game were recorded as hits. Here is the first one, and you can see he misjudges this line drive, and he comes in and then it sails over his head. MIsjudgement is NOT an error, so this correctly went down as a triple. Is it a ball that he needs to catch? Yes. Is it an error? No. An error is a physical misplay, and there is not a physicial misplay here. #LetsGoBucs #LGM

Lots of folks wondering why the two plays to Oneil Cruz in the Pittsburgh Pirates at New York Mets game were recorded as hits. Here is the first one, and you can see he misjudges this line drive, and he comes in and then it sails over his head. MIsjudgement is NOT an error, so this correctly went down as a triple. Is it a ball that he needs to catch? Yes. Is it an error? No. An error is a physical misplay, and there is not a physicial misplay here. #LetsGoBucs #LGM

MLB Scoring Changes

118,748 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

What Curve Beats a Straight Line? Take two fixed points A and B. A bead slides without friction under gravity. Among all possible curves connecting A to B, which one gives the smallest travel time? This is the Brachistochrone problem. The time functional is T[y] = ∫ √((1 + y′²)/(2gy)) dx where y is the vertical drop from the starting point. The winning curve is not a straight line. It is a cycloid x(θ) = a(θ - sin θ) y(θ) = a(1 - cos θ) The bead first falls steeply to gain speed, then uses that speed across the remaining distance. The path is longer than the straight segment, yet the travel time is smaller. The shortest path solves geometry. The fastest path solves variation. #CalculusOfVariations #Brachistochrone #Cycloid #ClassicalMechanics #MathematicalPhysics #Optimization #DifferentialEquations #PhysicsAnimation #Mathematics

What Curve Beats a Straight Line? Take two fixed points A and B. A bead slides without friction under gravity. Among all possible curves connecting A to B, which one gives the smallest travel time? This is the Brachistochrone problem. The time functional is T[y] = ∫ √((1 + y′²)/(2gy)) dx where y is the vertical drop from the starting point. The winning curve is not a straight line. It is a cycloid x(θ) = a(θ - sin θ) y(θ) = a(1 - cos θ) The bead first falls steeply to gain speed, then uses that speed across the remaining distance. The path is longer than the straight segment, yet the travel time is smaller. The shortest path solves geometry. The fastest path solves variation. #CalculusOfVariations #Brachistochrone #Cycloid #ClassicalMechanics #MathematicalPhysics #Optimization #DifferentialEquations #PhysicsAnimation #Mathematics

Mathelirium

17,600 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

a professor with a dozen tumors in his liver came to the university of virginia the day after chemotherapy and spent 75 minutes explaining how not to waste your own life. randy pausch called it a lecture on time management. he had three to six months of good health left, and three months and twelve days of it were already gone. students would ask whether the program was worth the money. pausch said the right question was a different one: is it worth two years of your life that you are never getting back? a deadline has a date and a person who will notice you missed it. importance has neither a date nor that person. so the urgent goes first in the queue, and then the next urgent thing goes first, even when it is worth nothing. pausch said to work on what is important while it still has no date. that is how the years disappear. hundreds of sensible, well argued hours spent on whatever asked more loudly. why am i doing this? what is my goal? what happens if i don't do it? the best moment, he said, is when you cross something off and find that nobody has come to take you to jail. every unnecessary task you delete hands back a piece of your life. five interruptions can destroy a whole hour. he also kept a time journal and filled it in as the day went. like a financial budget, the journal showed where the time had actually gone. the goal was never to become an uber-worker. it was to work efficiently enough to leave at five and go home to the people he loved. he died eight months later, at 47. he ended the lecture with one sentence: “time is all we have. and we may find one day you have less than you think.” the lecture is free. all 75 minutes are in the video below. what will you change in the next 30 days?

a professor with a dozen tumors in his liver came to the university of virginia the day after chemotherapy and spent 75 minutes explaining how not to waste your own life. randy pausch called it a lecture on time management. he had three to six months of good health left, and three months and twelve days of it were already gone. students would ask whether the program was worth the money. pausch said the right question was a different one: is it worth two years of your life that you are never getting back? a deadline has a date and a person who will notice you missed it. importance has neither a date nor that person. so the urgent goes first in the queue, and then the next urgent thing goes first, even when it is worth nothing. pausch said to work on what is important while it still has no date. that is how the years disappear. hundreds of sensible, well argued hours spent on whatever asked more loudly. why am i doing this? what is my goal? what happens if i don't do it? the best moment, he said, is when you cross something off and find that nobody has come to take you to jail. every unnecessary task you delete hands back a piece of your life. five interruptions can destroy a whole hour. he also kept a time journal and filled it in as the day went. like a financial budget, the journal showed where the time had actually gone. the goal was never to become an uber-worker. it was to work efficiently enough to leave at five and go home to the people he loved. he died eight months later, at 47. he ended the lecture with one sentence: “time is all we have. and we may find one day you have less than you think.” the lecture is free. all 75 minutes are in the video below. what will you change in the next 30 days?

Lima

16,547 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Alan Oppenheim, MIT professor: "Jump Trading pays quants $650K to pull one real signal out of market noise. I wrote the textbook on that exact math and taught it for free." this free MIT lecture is the math the whole "quant edge" is built on, and almost nobody selling you a course will name it. the man teaching it wrote the signal-processing textbook every engineer on earth learned from, and he put the lectures online for nothing. here is the idea. a price chart is a signal buried in noise. most of what you see is random static, and hidden inside is a faint, repeating pattern with real mathematics for pulling it out. that is not a metaphor. jim simons was a codebreaker who did exactly this to enemy transmissions, then pointed the same math at the market and made a hundred billion dollars. none of it is new. oppenheim taught this in 1987, the math is older, and every lecture is free. same story i told in the article above. the edge was never a secret formula. it was knowing a market is a noisy signal, and having the tools to read it. here is what the gurus skip. the math to separate signal from noise is free and everyone has it. the edge is cleaner data than the next desk, and the discipline to trust a faint signal across thousands of trades instead of chasing the static. the filter is free. the patience to use it is not.

Alan Oppenheim, MIT professor: "Jump Trading pays quants $650K to pull one real signal out of market noise. I wrote the textbook on that exact math and taught it for free." this free MIT lecture is the math the whole "quant edge" is built on, and almost nobody selling you a course will name it. the man teaching it wrote the signal-processing textbook every engineer on earth learned from, and he put the lectures online for nothing. here is the idea. a price chart is a signal buried in noise. most of what you see is random static, and hidden inside is a faint, repeating pattern with real mathematics for pulling it out. that is not a metaphor. jim simons was a codebreaker who did exactly this to enemy transmissions, then pointed the same math at the market and made a hundred billion dollars. none of it is new. oppenheim taught this in 1987, the math is older, and every lecture is free. same story i told in the article above. the edge was never a secret formula. it was knowing a market is a noisy signal, and having the tools to read it. here is what the gurus skip. the math to separate signal from noise is free and everyone has it. the edge is cleaner data than the next desk, and the discipline to trust a faint signal across thousands of trades instead of chasing the static. the filter is free. the patience to use it is not.

Rossst.03

281,905 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Gilbert Strang, MIT professor: "Anthropic pays $500,000 for one skill: linear algebra. a professor who gave 66 years to MIT taught all of it in his final lecture, for free." the article above hands you an AI that prints trading models on demand. strip the wrapper off any of them and one object is left. a matrix. Strang spent his whole career on that one thing, and this was the last time he ever wrote it on a chalkboard. look at what he puts up. A x = 0. the null space. it is every mix of your signals that cancels to nothing. an AI will hand you a thousand factors and half of them live right there, pure risk, zero return. a model is a covariance matrix, a set of eigenvectors, one projection. that is the entire machine. no magic, no black box. he was 88, and this was his last class ever. the recording sits free on YouTube while people pay for a worse version of what he gave away. the AI builds the matrix. Strang teaches you to read it. only one of those two skills holds its price.

Gilbert Strang, MIT professor: "Anthropic pays $500,000 for one skill: linear algebra. a professor who gave 66 years to MIT taught all of it in his final lecture, for free." the article above hands you an AI that prints trading models on demand. strip the wrapper off any of them and one object is left. a matrix. Strang spent his whole career on that one thing, and this was the last time he ever wrote it on a chalkboard. look at what he puts up. A x = 0. the null space. it is every mix of your signals that cancels to nothing. an AI will hand you a thousand factors and half of them live right there, pure risk, zero return. a model is a covariance matrix, a set of eigenvectors, one projection. that is the entire machine. no magic, no black box. he was 88, and this was his last class ever. the recording sits free on YouTube while people pay for a worse version of what he gave away. the AI builds the matrix. Strang teaches you to read it. only one of those two skills holds its price.

Rossst.03

67,844 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen

My dad looked at my screen and said "what is this, a hacker game?" It was a Polymarket bot making $400 while he was standing behind me He sat down. I explained Polymarket runs on one equation - softmax. The same math Claude uses to pick the next word C(q) = b · ln Σ e^(qi/b) 93% of traders don't know this formula exists They look at 40¢ and think "cheap" My bot looks at 40¢ and calculates the theoretical price is 58¢ I'm use for copytrade bots: That's an 18-cent edge per share Two more formulas do the rest: f* = (p·b − q) / b - Kelly Criterion. P(H|E) = P(E|H)·P(H) / P(E) - Bayes. I gave Claude all 4 and said "find every contract the market has wrong" $600 → $10,190. 425 trades. Still running 61.2% win rate - wrong 39% of the time. Doesn't matter. The sizing formula makes sure wins pay more than losses cost 87% of wallets lose money trading against this math The 4 formulas are on Wikipedia. The code fits in one file The only edge: my bot reads them at 3 AM when the market is mispriced and nobody's looking My dad still calls it a hacker game. But he stopped asking when I'm getting a "real job" Only math + code, no more

My dad looked at my screen and said "what is this, a hacker game?" It was a Polymarket bot making $400 while he was standing behind me He sat down. I explained Polymarket runs on one equation - softmax. The same math Claude uses to pick the next word C(q) = b · ln Σ e^(qi/b) 93% of traders don't know this formula exists They look at 40¢ and think "cheap" My bot looks at 40¢ and calculates the theoretical price is 58¢ I'm use for copytrade bots: That's an 18-cent edge per share Two more formulas do the rest: f* = (p·b − q) / b - Kelly Criterion. P(H|E) = P(E|H)·P(H) / P(E) - Bayes. I gave Claude all 4 and said "find every contract the market has wrong" $600 → $10,190. 425 trades. Still running 61.2% win rate - wrong 39% of the time. Doesn't matter. The sizing formula makes sure wins pay more than losses cost 87% of wallets lose money trading against this math The 4 formulas are on Wikipedia. The code fits in one file The only edge: my bot reads them at 3 AM when the market is mispriced and nobody's looking My dad still calls it a hacker game. But he stopped asking when I'm getting a "real job" Only math + code, no more

Lunar

108,420 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

A BBC interviewer asked a Nobel physicist the simplest question in the world: why do two magnets push each other apart. He refused to answer it. What he did instead is the best seven minutes on thinking ever filmed. The man is Richard Feynman, at home in 1983, no blackboard, no notes, sitting in an armchair. He does not dodge because he cannot answer. He dodges because he wants you to see what the question is actually asking. So he takes an ordinary sentence, that a woman slipped on the ice and broke her hip, and starts asking why, and every answer opens another why, until the ground gives way. Then he turns it around on the interviewer with a question about ice that sounds trivial and is not. The point he arrives at is the uncomfortable one. Every explanation is only a translation into something you already accept without explanation. Magnets have no such translation. There is nothing more familiar than magnetism to reduce magnetism to, which is why every answer you were given at school was a picture, not a reason. It matters more now than it did in 1983. Any tool will hand you a fluent answer in a second. Knowing which questions actually have a bottom is the part that is still yours. One question. Seven minutes. It is in the video.

A BBC interviewer asked a Nobel physicist the simplest question in the world: why do two magnets push each other apart. He refused to answer it. What he did instead is the best seven minutes on thinking ever filmed. The man is Richard Feynman, at home in 1983, no blackboard, no notes, sitting in an armchair. He does not dodge because he cannot answer. He dodges because he wants you to see what the question is actually asking. So he takes an ordinary sentence, that a woman slipped on the ice and broke her hip, and starts asking why, and every answer opens another why, until the ground gives way. Then he turns it around on the interviewer with a question about ice that sounds trivial and is not. The point he arrives at is the uncomfortable one. Every explanation is only a translation into something you already accept without explanation. Magnets have no such translation. There is nothing more familiar than magnetism to reduce magnetism to, which is why every answer you were given at school was a picture, not a reason. It matters more now than it did in 1983. Any tool will hand you a fluent answer in a second. Knowing which questions actually have a bottom is the part that is still yours. One question. Seven minutes. It is in the video.

Stefan.

3,000,308 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

E: Did you say that Yaşar’s daughter is sick? N: Yes, why? What happened? E: Nothing. We just talked a bit, shared some troubles. N: You? You talked things out with the man who threatened me with you, Eşref? E: I wanted to talk a bit before teaching him a lesson. E: He said he had a daughter. He also said he wouldn’t do anything wrong to Ms. Nisan. N: And? E: That’s all. You don’t need to know the rest. N: He called me too. And I told him what a terrible father he is. E: When did this happen? N: What does it matter, Eşref? Why did you call me? Was it because of this? E: No. I just wanted to call. E: When the man said, “You’ll understand when you have a daughter,” I got curious. I was trying to understand what he meant. N: Why did you say something like that? E: We had to take a car trip today. N: Eşref, you didn’t do anything to the man, right? He has a daughter. E: Nisan, I didn’t do anything to him. If something happened after I left, then it’s fate. E: When he started talking about being a father…I tried to understand what he meant. That’s why I called. N:And you called me. E: I have only one love in this life, Nisan.And that is you. Is it something like that? N: I don’t know. I really don’t know. They say when you have a child, you feel very different. That feeling isn’t like anything else. E: You used to say you wanted to start a family. Can you see yourself? What kind of mother would you be? N: Then who are you pregnant by? E: Don’t be ridiculous Nisan. That’s not even a question. N: A girl or a boy? E: A girl. Let her be like you. D: Ms. Nisan, if you’re ready, shall we begin? N: Who is that? N: Eşref! #EşrefRüya #EşSan

Sensitive content

E: Did you say that Yaşar’s daughter is sick? N: Yes, why? What happened? E: Nothing. We just talked a bit, shared some troubles. N: You? You talked things out with the man who threatened me with you, Eşref? E: I wanted to talk a bit before teaching him a lesson. E: He said he had a daughter. He also said he wouldn’t do anything wrong to Ms. Nisan. N: And? E: That’s all. You don’t need to know the rest. N: He called me too. And I told him what a terrible father he is. E: When did this happen? N: What does it matter, Eşref? Why did you call me? Was it because of this? E: No. I just wanted to call. E: When the man said, “You’ll understand when you have a daughter,” I got curious. I was trying to understand what he meant. N: Why did you say something like that? E: We had to take a car trip today. N: Eşref, you didn’t do anything to the man, right? He has a daughter. E: Nisan, I didn’t do anything to him. If something happened after I left, then it’s fate. E: When he started talking about being a father…I tried to understand what he meant. That’s why I called. N:And you called me. E: I have only one love in this life, Nisan.And that is you. Is it something like that? N: I don’t know. I really don’t know. They say when you have a child, you feel very different. That feeling isn’t like anything else. E: You used to say you wanted to start a family. Can you see yourself? What kind of mother would you be? N: Then who are you pregnant by? E: Don’t be ridiculous Nisan. That’s not even a question. N: A girl or a boy? E: A girl. Let her be like you. D: Ms. Nisan, if you’re ready, shall we begin? N: Who is that? N: Eşref! #EşrefRüya #EşSan

𝖀𝖓𝖐𝖓𝖔𝖜𝖓

30,772 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

A NASA fellow claims the modern world runs on one equation. Your phone signal, wifi, satellites, this post reaching your screen. All of it obeys one line of math written in the 1860s, before the light bulb existed. His words. The man is Ali Alqaraghuli, a former NASA postdoctoral fellow who now runs two hardware companies. And the way he teaches it is what makes the video worth it. He does not derive the equation. He teaches you to read it. His claim is that school taught you to read math wrong, and one symbol proves it: what you were told is a plus sign is actually something else. Once you see it, the whole equation turns from notation into a sentence. Then he uses that sentence to walk you through how a signal actually gets from your phone to a satellite and back. One viewer called that section straight up magic. It is 4 minutes of it. The comments are the proof. A physics student wrote it explained what a semester with his professor could not. An electrical engineer admitted this is where the equations finally clicked. One person wrote: I cried and I do not even know why. His larger point: the wireless world is not magic and never was. It is one readable line, and reading it is a skill nobody bothered to teach you. One equation. Everything wireless. 14 minutes. It is in the video.

A NASA fellow claims the modern world runs on one equation. Your phone signal, wifi, satellites, this post reaching your screen. All of it obeys one line of math written in the 1860s, before the light bulb existed. His words. The man is Ali Alqaraghuli, a former NASA postdoctoral fellow who now runs two hardware companies. And the way he teaches it is what makes the video worth it. He does not derive the equation. He teaches you to read it. His claim is that school taught you to read math wrong, and one symbol proves it: what you were told is a plus sign is actually something else. Once you see it, the whole equation turns from notation into a sentence. Then he uses that sentence to walk you through how a signal actually gets from your phone to a satellite and back. One viewer called that section straight up magic. It is 4 minutes of it. The comments are the proof. A physics student wrote it explained what a semester with his professor could not. An electrical engineer admitted this is where the equations finally clicked. One person wrote: I cried and I do not even know why. His larger point: the wireless world is not magic and never was. It is one readable line, and reading it is a skill nobody bothered to teach you. One equation. Everything wireless. 14 minutes. It is in the video.

ooaes

28,543 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

An MIT professor solved the equation Wall Street pays $500K for, in a lecture about how to find the top of a hill. MIT put the whole thing online. it has been free for years. almost nobody finishes it. his point: finding the best possible answer to almost anything is one move. write down what you want to grow, take the derivative, and find the exact spot where it stops climbing. that spot is the answer. he is Denis Auroux, and his 18.02 lectures have taught more people calculus than most universities have students. now the equation from the post above, the one that tells you exactly how much to bet. it is not a secret formula. it is this. the growth of your money is a curve. bet too little and you are low on the hill. bet too much and you have gone over the top and started falling. Kelly's number is just the peak. no magic. no fund. one hill, and the single point where it stops going up. a quant I know rewatches this exact lecture before he sizes a single position. you were handed the formula and told to trust it. Auroux shows you where it actually comes from, for free, and it has been sitting there the whole time.

An MIT professor solved the equation Wall Street pays $500K for, in a lecture about how to find the top of a hill. MIT put the whole thing online. it has been free for years. almost nobody finishes it. his point: finding the best possible answer to almost anything is one move. write down what you want to grow, take the derivative, and find the exact spot where it stops climbing. that spot is the answer. he is Denis Auroux, and his 18.02 lectures have taught more people calculus than most universities have students. now the equation from the post above, the one that tells you exactly how much to bet. it is not a secret formula. it is this. the growth of your money is a curve. bet too little and you are low on the hill. bet too much and you have gone over the top and started falling. Kelly's number is just the peak. no magic. no fund. one hill, and the single point where it stops going up. a quant I know rewatches this exact lecture before he sizes a single position. you were handed the formula and told to trust it. Auroux shows you where it actually comes from, for free, and it has been sitting there the whole time.

Loran

95,530 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Performance Baseball is excited to announce the addition of 2029 Maddox Bryant (Kingwood HS) to Performance Baseball 2029 National. Maddox is one of the top players in the Country with an elite tool set and proven success at the highest levels. The left handed hitting middle infielder possesses the hit tool and power to go along with it, well beyond his years. But what stands out the most is the way he plays the game, the energy and poise is at a different level. There’s no doubt that his first HS Summer on the circuit will be a huge one! #PB #Performance #X2 Maddox Bryant X2 B a s e b a l l

Performance Baseball is excited to announce the addition of 2029 Maddox Bryant (Kingwood HS) to Performance Baseball 2029 National. Maddox is one of the top players in the Country with an elite tool set and proven success at the highest levels. The left handed hitting middle infielder possesses the hit tool and power to go along with it, well beyond his years. But what stands out the most is the way he plays the game, the energy and poise is at a different level. There’s no doubt that his first HS Summer on the circuit will be a huge one! #PB #Performance #X2 Maddox Bryant X2 B a s e b a l l

Performance Baseball X2

14,634 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

An MIT professor opened his first lecture by auctioning off a sealed box to twenty-two-year-olds who had zero information about what was inside. No touching it. No shaking it. No hints. Just a box. The bidding started at $1. It closed at $45. He ripped it open. An iPod Nano, retail value $149. The class had priced an unknown object, sight unseen, at roughly a third of its real worth — in about ninety seconds, with nothing but each other's bids to go on. That's minute twenty of session one of 15.401, Finance Theory, taught by Andrew Lo at MIT Sloan. Free. On YouTube. Since 2008. Before the auction, Lo puts up three names on the board: James Simons, a math professor who built the most successful hedge fund in history. Warren Buffett, who runs his empire with a tiny staff and literal high-school arithmetic. Jack Welch, an engineer by training who quadrupled GE's revenue without touching a single equation from his own PhD. Three totally different backgrounds. One shared trait — they all speak the language of finance instinctively. Then Lo tells the room something most finance bootcamps charge $3,000 a weekend to imply and never actually prove: finance isn't really about complex math. It's about two problems only — valuing things, and deciding what to do once you know the value. Everything else, thirteen weeks of it, is commentary. There are no problem sets in this course. He hands you the entire exam question bank on day one and tells you the majority of exam points come straight from it. He says it flat out: memorize the whole stack and you'll pass — except by then you'll have accidentally learned finance. The full thirteen weeks are still sitting on MIT OpenCourseWare, untouched by most people who bookmark it. The lecture is free. Bidding on the box after everyone else already has is the entire course in miniature.

An MIT professor opened his first lecture by auctioning off a sealed box to twenty-two-year-olds who had zero information about what was inside. No touching it. No shaking it. No hints. Just a box. The bidding started at $1. It closed at $45. He ripped it open. An iPod Nano, retail value $149. The class had priced an unknown object, sight unseen, at roughly a third of its real worth — in about ninety seconds, with nothing but each other's bids to go on. That's minute twenty of session one of 15.401, Finance Theory, taught by Andrew Lo at MIT Sloan. Free. On YouTube. Since 2008. Before the auction, Lo puts up three names on the board: James Simons, a math professor who built the most successful hedge fund in history. Warren Buffett, who runs his empire with a tiny staff and literal high-school arithmetic. Jack Welch, an engineer by training who quadrupled GE's revenue without touching a single equation from his own PhD. Three totally different backgrounds. One shared trait — they all speak the language of finance instinctively. Then Lo tells the room something most finance bootcamps charge $3,000 a weekend to imply and never actually prove: finance isn't really about complex math. It's about two problems only — valuing things, and deciding what to do once you know the value. Everything else, thirteen weeks of it, is commentary. There are no problem sets in this course. He hands you the entire exam question bank on day one and tells you the majority of exam points come straight from it. He says it flat out: memorize the whole stack and you'll pass — except by then you'll have accidentally learned finance. The full thirteen weeks are still sitting on MIT OpenCourseWare, untouched by most people who bookmark it. The lecture is free. Bidding on the box after everyone else already has is the entire course in miniature.

Beaver

1,387,067 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

GAWIN GONE AWAY MV #GoneAwayGAWINmv E: how was it shooting mv with p’gawin? B: hoo it was the first time that… B: i get to meet/talk to him like in real B: p’gawin is a very cute person… B: he’s like gentle gentle… soft soft E: yesss i agreed too kaa E: he gives off a feeling like “he’ll give you what you want” like “krub what do you say? okay krub” E: he is a veryyy cute guyy B: yesss kaaaa

GAWIN GONE AWAY MV #GoneAwayGAWINmv E: how was it shooting mv with p’gawin? B: hoo it was the first time that… B: i get to meet/talk to him like in real B: p’gawin is a very cute person… B: he’s like gentle gentle… soft soft E: yesss i agreed too kaa E: he gives off a feeling like “he’ll give you what you want” like “krub what do you say? okay krub” E: he is a veryyy cute guyy B: yesss kaaaa

bbrie 🥑

60,329 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat