正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

What happens when you take a polynomial and keep changing its coefficients every frame? You get a resonant root field in the complex plane where clusters, arcs and outer flares form, dissolve, and reappear as the system evolves in time.

Mathelirium

36,869 subscribers

17,351 次观看 • 3 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

In String Theory, we ask a deceptively simple question What happens when you replace a point with something stretched across space and time? On one side, the particle draws a world line. On the other, a string fills out a world-sheet as every point along it evolves together.

In String Theory, we ask a deceptively simple question What happens when you replace a point with something stretched across space and time? On one side, the particle draws a world line. On the other, a string fills out a world-sheet as every point along it evolves together.

Mathelirium

16,325 次观看 • 3 个月前

Finding the roots of a polynomial is one of the oldest and most central problems in Algebra. Once the coefficients are allowed to move through the complex plane, the roots start revealing a much richer geometry. Here is the Mathematics, try it yourself and play around with the coefficients and polynomial structure: P(x) = x¹² + a x⁸ + b x⁶ + c x⁴ + d x + 1 a = (sin(t₁) + i cos(sin(t₂) + 0.5 sin(2t₂))) M b = 0.3 (t₁ + t₂) Mᶜ c = (exp(i t₁) - cos(t₂)) M d = (cos(t₁) - 0.5 i sin(sin(t₂) + 0.5 sin(2t₂))) Mᶜ M = 1 + ∑ₖ₌₁ᵐ Aₖ exp(i 2π sₖ n / N) Mᶜ = 1 + ∑ₖ₌₁ᵐ Aₖ exp(-i 2π sₖ n / N) Here t₁ and t₂ lie on the unit circle, n is the frame index, N is the total number of frames, and Aₖ, sₖ are the modulation amplitudes and speeds.

Finding the roots of a polynomial is one of the oldest and most central problems in Algebra. Once the coefficients are allowed to move through the complex plane, the roots start revealing a much richer geometry. Here is the Mathematics, try it yourself and play around with the coefficients and polynomial structure: P(x) = x¹² + a x⁸ + b x⁶ + c x⁴ + d x + 1 a = (sin(t₁) + i cos(sin(t₂) + 0.5 sin(2t₂))) M b = 0.3 (t₁ + t₂) Mᶜ c = (exp(i t₁) - cos(t₂)) M d = (cos(t₁) - 0.5 i sin(sin(t₂) + 0.5 sin(2t₂))) Mᶜ M = 1 + ∑ₖ₌₁ᵐ Aₖ exp(i 2π sₖ n / N) Mᶜ = 1 + ∑ₖ₌₁ᵐ Aₖ exp(-i 2π sₖ n / N) Here t₁ and t₂ lie on the unit circle, n is the frame index, N is the total number of frames, and Aₖ, sₖ are the modulation amplitudes and speeds.

Mathelirium

23,042 次观看 • 4 个月前

Gravity makes things orbit...but what happens when the mass distribution itself is rotating and dragging phase space into resonances and chaos? In this scene we follow tens of thousands of stars in a toy barred galaxy: a flat disc with a central mass and a rotating bar of extra density that is not rigid, but wobbling, swaying, and breathing in strength over time. The stars start on almost circular orbits in a calm ring, but as the bar turns and its pattern speed and strength modulate, they feel a time-dependent gravitational shove that nudges some onto resonant tracks. 🤩😍 #Mathelirium #Astrophysics #GalacticDynamics #BarredGalaxy #PhaseSpace #HamiltonianChaos #OrbitalResonance

Gravity makes things orbit...but what happens when the mass distribution itself is rotating and dragging phase space into resonances and chaos? In this scene we follow tens of thousands of stars in a toy barred galaxy: a flat disc with a central mass and a rotating bar of extra density that is not rigid, but wobbling, swaying, and breathing in strength over time. The stars start on almost circular orbits in a calm ring, but as the bar turns and its pattern speed and strength modulate, they feel a time-dependent gravitational shove that nudges some onto resonant tracks. 🤩😍 #Mathelirium #Astrophysics #GalacticDynamics #BarredGalaxy #PhaseSpace #HamiltonianChaos #OrbitalResonance

Mathelirium

152,143 次观看 • 9 个月前

What you're seeing here is the root dynamics of a smoothly time-modulated complex polynomial. A living membrane breathes while four satellites orbit, dock, fuse with the core, then split again. From the simplest task in algebra...finding roots...emerges natural-feeling, sophisticated motion. #ComplexPolynomials #ComplexAnalysis #MathArt #Mathematics

What you're seeing here is the root dynamics of a smoothly time-modulated complex polynomial. A living membrane breathes while four satellites orbit, dock, fuse with the core, then split again. From the simplest task in algebra...finding roots...emerges natural-feeling, sophisticated motion. #ComplexPolynomials #ComplexAnalysis #MathArt #Mathematics

Mathelirium

63,230 次观看 • 9 个月前

The evolving lemniscates of a time-choreographed complex polynomial. *DM me if you would like to see the math framework...bots are killing me.

The evolving lemniscates of a time-choreographed complex polynomial. *DM me if you would like to see the math framework...bots are killing me.

Mathelirium

18,318 次观看 • 11 个月前

This is a living map of a complex rational field: cool regions are root-dominant (|R| 1), where R is the complex rational function. Phase stripes come from arg S (the logarithmic derivative of our complex field R) and particles surf the Newton flow. 🤩🤗😍

This is a living map of a complex rational field: cool regions are root-dominant (|R| 1), where R is the complex rational function. Phase stripes come from arg S (the logarithmic derivative of our complex field R) and particles surf the Newton flow. 🤩🤗😍

Mathelirium

29,237 次观看 • 10 个月前

Phase Space Is the Real Stage of Dynamics. So, Stop Watching the Object and Watch the State. Ordinary Space tells you where something is. Phase Space tells you what state it is in. Position alone is not enough because you also need the variable that tells you where the system is trying to go. In the animation, the left panel shows the particle moving in Ordinary Space, while the right panel shows the same system as a moving point in Phase Space. For one degree of freedom, the state is (x, p) and as time evolves, that state traces a trajectory t ↦ (x(t), p(t)) Instead of thinking of a differential equation as just a formula, Phase Space lets you see it as a flow on the space of states. For this lecture we use ẋ = p ṗ = x − x³ with Hamiltonian H(x,p) = 0.5 p² + 0.25 x⁴ − 0.5 x² #PhaseSpace #DynamicalSystems #NonlinearDynamics #HamiltonianMechanics #Mathematics

Phase Space Is the Real Stage of Dynamics. So, Stop Watching the Object and Watch the State. Ordinary Space tells you where something is. Phase Space tells you what state it is in. Position alone is not enough because you also need the variable that tells you where the system is trying to go. In the animation, the left panel shows the particle moving in Ordinary Space, while the right panel shows the same system as a moving point in Phase Space. For one degree of freedom, the state is (x, p) and as time evolves, that state traces a trajectory t ↦ (x(t), p(t)) Instead of thinking of a differential equation as just a formula, Phase Space lets you see it as a flow on the space of states. For this lecture we use ẋ = p ṗ = x − x³ with Hamiltonian H(x,p) = 0.5 p² + 0.25 x⁴ − 0.5 x² #PhaseSpace #DynamicalSystems #NonlinearDynamics #HamiltonianMechanics #Mathematics

Mathelirium

30,457 次观看 • 5 个月前

Roots of complex polynomials with time-modulated geodesic coefficients. What are the roots telling us?

Roots of complex polynomials with time-modulated geodesic coefficients. What are the roots telling us?

Mathelirium

15,187 次观看 • 7 个月前

This is what happens when you take the time to train white youth at a young age and enforce discipline as well as the warrior mindset. This is literally what the system fears. WPWW

This is what happens when you take the time to train white youth at a young age and enforce discipline as well as the warrior mindset. This is literally what the system fears. WPWW

Doochebag

404,800 次观看 • 2 年前

$Today we introduce Stochastic Differential Equations (SDEs). I find that the best way to introduce these complex concepts is to look at an application. This is part I of the lecture🙂 We look at the theory behind electromagnetic scattering/radar clutter which leads to anomaly detection on scattering statistics. When a narrowband wave scatters off a messy cloud of particles, the complex field at your receiver is a random phasor sum...at time t you can write the electric field as E_N(t) = Σⱼ₌₁ᴺ e^{iθⱼ(t)}, each term a unit arrow in the complex plane from scatterer j. This is exactly where the magic of Brownian motion appears naturally and in the most reasonable way. Think of all the microscopic chaos...tiny motions, index fluctuations, path jitters, Doppler shifts that shows up as small random kicks to the phases θⱼ(t) over very short times. If you just made θⱼ(t) random in an ad-hoc way (say, resampling independent angles at each time), the field would jump around unrealistically with no temporal structure. Brownian motion is what you get when you let each phase take the continuous-time limit of many tiny, independent kicks...it’s continuous in t, it has the right cumulative variance growth, and it remembers just enough of its past to look physical. So we model each phase as a Brownian walk, θⱼ(t) = θⱼ⁰ + σ_θ Bⱼ(t), with independent Brownian motions Bⱼ(t) and a phase-diffusion rate σ_θ. Brownian motion here isn’t window dressing...it’s the clean way to compress all the small random stuff into a single process that actually matches how the phases wander in time. #StochasticProcesses #BrownianMotion #ItoCalculus #RadarClutter #RayleighScattering #SignalProcessing$

Today we introduce Stochastic Differential Equations (SDEs). I find that the best way to introduce these complex concepts is to look at an application. This is part I of the lecture🙂 We look at the theory behind electromagnetic scattering/radar clutter which leads to anomaly detection on scattering statistics. When a narrowband wave scatters off a messy cloud of particles, the complex field at your receiver is a random phasor sum...at time t you can write the electric field as E_N(t) = Σⱼ₌₁ᴺ e^{iθⱼ(t)}, each term a unit arrow in the complex plane from scatterer j. This is exactly where the magic of Brownian motion appears naturally and in the most reasonable way. Think of all the microscopic chaos...tiny motions, index fluctuations, path jitters, Doppler shifts that shows up as small random kicks to the phases θⱼ(t) over very short times. If you just made θⱼ(t) random in an ad-hoc way (say, resampling independent angles at each time), the field would jump around unrealistically with no temporal structure. Brownian motion is what you get when you let each phase take the continuous-time limit of many tiny, independent kicks...it’s continuous in t, it has the right cumulative variance growth, and it remembers just enough of its past to look physical. So we model each phase as a Brownian walk, θⱼ(t) = θⱼ⁰ + σ_θ Bⱼ(t), with independent Brownian motions Bⱼ(t) and a phase-diffusion rate σ_θ. Brownian motion here isn’t window dressing...it’s the clean way to compress all the small random stuff into a single process that actually matches how the phases wander in time. #StochasticProcesses #BrownianMotion #ItoCalculus #RadarClutter #RayleighScattering #SignalProcessing

Mathelirium

55,319 次观看 • 8 个月前

Ask anyone who’s taken a course in Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs) what a solution to an ODE represents geometrically, and most of them won’t have a clean answer. When I first took ordinary differential equations, the pattern was always the same. Early on it turns into a speedrun of methods: separation of variables, integrating factors, variation of parameters, Bernoulli, exact equations. Then pretty quickly the course slides into hammer-picking. Spot the form, apply the recipe, move on. Too mechanical! And the real problem is what you don’t walk away with. You leave with a toolkit, but without a feel for what a differential equation even is, especially geometrically. That matters because in real modeling the equations you meet are rarely nice enough to reward memorised recipes. So you get trained to solve toy forms, while the actual subject stays blurry. The behavior. The flow. The shape of solutions. It wasn't until I watched the first lecture of Professor Arthur Mattuck that I realized I didn’t actually know what a solution to a differential equation represents geometrically. His point is almost embarrassingly simple. A first-order ODE is a slope field, and a solution is a curve that stays tangent to that field everywhere. The math breakdown: Write the ODE as dy/dx = f(x,y). At each point (x,y), attach a tiny line segment with slope f(x,y). A function y = y₁(x) is a solution exactly when its graph follows those slopes. At every x, the slope of the curve equals the slope prescribed by the field at the point on the curve. That’s the one line that ties both viewpoints together: y₁′(x) = f(x, y₁(x)). So solving the ODE and drawing an integral curve are the same statement in two languages. Once you see that, you stop obsessing over whether you can write y(x) in closed form. You start asking the questions that actually matter. Where do solutions flow. Where do they get trapped. Where do they blow up. Where does existence or uniqueness fail because the field isn’t even defined? That’s the perspective shift I wish every ODE course forces early. It’s also why I keep pairing math with animation. #DifferentialEquations #ODEs #VectorFields #AppliedMathematics #Mathematics #

Ask anyone who’s taken a course in Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs) what a solution to an ODE represents geometrically, and most of them won’t have a clean answer. When I first took ordinary differential equations, the pattern was always the same. Early on it turns into a speedrun of methods: separation of variables, integrating factors, variation of parameters, Bernoulli, exact equations. Then pretty quickly the course slides into hammer-picking. Spot the form, apply the recipe, move on. Too mechanical! And the real problem is what you don’t walk away with. You leave with a toolkit, but without a feel for what a differential equation even is, especially geometrically. That matters because in real modeling the equations you meet are rarely nice enough to reward memorised recipes. So you get trained to solve toy forms, while the actual subject stays blurry. The behavior. The flow. The shape of solutions. It wasn't until I watched the first lecture of Professor Arthur Mattuck that I realized I didn’t actually know what a solution to a differential equation represents geometrically. His point is almost embarrassingly simple. A first-order ODE is a slope field, and a solution is a curve that stays tangent to that field everywhere. The math breakdown: Write the ODE as dy/dx = f(x,y). At each point (x,y), attach a tiny line segment with slope f(x,y). A function y = y₁(x) is a solution exactly when its graph follows those slopes. At every x, the slope of the curve equals the slope prescribed by the field at the point on the curve. That’s the one line that ties both viewpoints together: y₁′(x) = f(x, y₁(x)). So solving the ODE and drawing an integral curve are the same statement in two languages. Once you see that, you stop obsessing over whether you can write y(x) in closed form. You start asking the questions that actually matter. Where do solutions flow. Where do they get trapped. Where do they blow up. Where does existence or uniqueness fail because the field isn’t even defined? That’s the perspective shift I wish every ODE course forces early. It’s also why I keep pairing math with animation. #DifferentialEquations #ODEs #VectorFields #AppliedMathematics #Mathematics #

Mathelirium

40,841 次观看 • 6 个月前

This isn't VFX visual effects...it's actual freakin physics! 🤯🤩🤗🙌🏾 You're watching the physics of space and matter coevolve...a small window into the kind of world Wolfram Physics Wolfram predicts. Every ripple, collision, and shimmer you see is a causal event in a living hypergraph. Space itself is an active network of nodes and links...springs and diagonals...constantly stretching, relaxing, and rewriting as the system evolves. Each interaction you see...a nutrient diffusing through the medium, a burrower tunneling, a tentacle feeling drag...is a computation of spacetime itself. Every connection that forms or breaks is an update to the causal structure: a new link, a new moment in the unfolding hypergraph universe. Our environment behaves like an adaptive fabric...the lattice tightens where organisms stir it, loosens where they pass. Chemical fields spread through those same links, feeding back into motion and growth. When the cluster pulsates, it's literally reorganizing local causal geometry...matter and space changing together!👌🏾 We even test causal invariance frame by frame, swapping operation orders to ensure that spacetime remains consistent no matter the update path. That's not animation logic...that's a computational physics experiment running live!🥳 Tentacles feel friction, burrowers dig through gradients, and behind them the lattice stiffens, storing history as structure. #Mathematics #Physics #WolframPhysics #Mathelirium

This isn't VFX visual effects...it's actual freakin physics! 🤯🤩🤗🙌🏾 You're watching the physics of space and matter coevolve...a small window into the kind of world Wolfram Physics Wolfram predicts. Every ripple, collision, and shimmer you see is a causal event in a living hypergraph. Space itself is an active network of nodes and links...springs and diagonals...constantly stretching, relaxing, and rewriting as the system evolves. Each interaction you see...a nutrient diffusing through the medium, a burrower tunneling, a tentacle feeling drag...is a computation of spacetime itself. Every connection that forms or breaks is an update to the causal structure: a new link, a new moment in the unfolding hypergraph universe. Our environment behaves like an adaptive fabric...the lattice tightens where organisms stir it, loosens where they pass. Chemical fields spread through those same links, feeding back into motion and growth. When the cluster pulsates, it's literally reorganizing local causal geometry...matter and space changing together!👌🏾 We even test causal invariance frame by frame, swapping operation orders to ensure that spacetime remains consistent no matter the update path. That's not animation logic...that's a computational physics experiment running live!🥳 Tentacles feel friction, burrowers dig through gradients, and behind them the lattice stiffens, storing history as structure. #Mathematics #Physics #WolframPhysics #Mathelirium

Mathelirium

20,090 次观看 • 10 个月前

$When gravitational potential rotates, it can lock onto an orbit’s phase and start rearranging motion. Order can turn into visible structure, and structure can slide into chaos, without any collisions or extra bodies. This is a toy barred galaxy...a softened central potential plus a rotating bar-shaped overdensity. The bar is not a metronome. Its angle sways and wobbles, and its strength breathes over time, so the force field keeps changing. I seed about 45k test stars on near-circular orbits in a ring and evolve them by using Newton’s 2nd law step by step (velocity Verlet scheme)...the potential is time-dependent. As the bar turns, resonances trap some stars into long-lived orbital families. Others get stretched into spiral-like streams as the ring is sheared. A fraction drift into chaotic layers, where tiny timing differences blow up because the resonance boundaries are moving. What you see in the trails is phase space being rewritten...stable islands, separating boundaries, broken tori, and mixing. #Astrophysics #GalacticDynamics #BarredGalaxy #HamiltonianChaos #PhaseSpace #OrbitalResonance$

When gravitational potential rotates, it can lock onto an orbit’s phase and start rearranging motion. Order can turn into visible structure, and structure can slide into chaos, without any collisions or extra bodies. This is a toy barred galaxy...a softened central potential plus a rotating bar-shaped overdensity. The bar is not a metronome. Its angle sways and wobbles, and its strength breathes over time, so the force field keeps changing. I seed about 45k test stars on near-circular orbits in a ring and evolve them by using Newton’s 2nd law step by step (velocity Verlet scheme)...the potential is time-dependent. As the bar turns, resonances trap some stars into long-lived orbital families. Others get stretched into spiral-like streams as the ring is sheared. A fraction drift into chaotic layers, where tiny timing differences blow up because the resonance boundaries are moving. What you see in the trails is phase space being rewritten...stable islands, separating boundaries, broken tori, and mixing. #Astrophysics #GalacticDynamics #BarredGalaxy #HamiltonianChaos #PhaseSpace #OrbitalResonance

Mathelirium

16,103 次观看 • 7 个月前

What happens when you put a star and a diamond in the ring together? You get a spectacle. ✨💎 #WWEEvolve #Champ

What happens when you put a star and a diamond in the ring together? You get a spectacle. ✨💎 #WWEEvolve #Champ

Aaron Rourke 🏳️‍🌈

23,912 次观看 • 4 个月前

When I first took ordinary differential equations, the pattern was always the same. Week 1 turns into a speedrun of methods: separation of variables, integrating factors, variation of parameters, Bernoulli, exact equations… and by Week 2 or 3 the course has quietly degenerated into hammer-picking. Spot the form, apply the recipe, move on. Mechanical! Fuuuuck!😫😫😫😫 The problem is what you don’t walk away with. You leave with a toolkit, but without a feel for what a differential equation even is, especially geometrically. And that’s a big deal, because in real modeling the equations you meet are rarely nice enough to reward memorized recipes. So you end up trained to solve toy forms, while the actual subject...the behavior, the flow, the shape of solutions stays blurry. This is why I’m biased toward the old-timers. Their old-school way of doing things always surprises me:...they’ll spend time on one idea until it sticks, instead of sprinting through a syllabus checklist. One lecture from them and you start noticing a contrast. A lot of modern teaching feels like "finish the content,". You get marched through techniques, but you’re not left with a single thought that keeps bothering you later...the kind of thought that actually pushes you toward research-level curiosity. MIT OpenCourseWare’s Professor Arthur Mattuck did that to me in his very first ODE lecture. One lecture, and your whole relationship with dy/dx = f(x,y) changes. In this segment, Prof. Mattuck is basically saying: A first-order ODE is a slope field, and a solution is a curve that moves everywhere tangent to that field. The math breakdown Write the ODE as dy/dx = f(x,y). At each point (x,y) you attach a tiny line segment with slope f(x,y). A function y = y₁(x) is a solution exactly when its graph follows those slopes:. At every x, the slope of the curve equals the slope prescribed by the field at the point on the curve. That’s the single line that unifies both viewpoints: y₁′(x) = f(x, y₁(x)). So solving the ODE and drawing an integral curve are the same statement in two languages!👌🏻 Once you see that, you can stop obsessing over whether you can write y(x) in closed form. You can start asking the questions that matter: where do solutions flow, where do they get trapped, where do they blow up, and where does existence/uniqueness fail just because the field isn’t even defined? That’s the perspective shift I wish every ODE course forces early and it’s exactly why I keep pairing math with animation. #DifferentialEquations #ODEs #VectorFields #MathAnimation #Mathematics

When I first took ordinary differential equations, the pattern was always the same. Week 1 turns into a speedrun of methods: separation of variables, integrating factors, variation of parameters, Bernoulli, exact equations… and by Week 2 or 3 the course has quietly degenerated into hammer-picking. Spot the form, apply the recipe, move on. Mechanical! Fuuuuck!😫😫😫😫 The problem is what you don’t walk away with. You leave with a toolkit, but without a feel for what a differential equation even is, especially geometrically. And that’s a big deal, because in real modeling the equations you meet are rarely nice enough to reward memorized recipes. So you end up trained to solve toy forms, while the actual subject...the behavior, the flow, the shape of solutions stays blurry. This is why I’m biased toward the old-timers. Their old-school way of doing things always surprises me:...they’ll spend time on one idea until it sticks, instead of sprinting through a syllabus checklist. One lecture from them and you start noticing a contrast. A lot of modern teaching feels like "finish the content,". You get marched through techniques, but you’re not left with a single thought that keeps bothering you later...the kind of thought that actually pushes you toward research-level curiosity. MIT OpenCourseWare’s Professor Arthur Mattuck did that to me in his very first ODE lecture. One lecture, and your whole relationship with dy/dx = f(x,y) changes. In this segment, Prof. Mattuck is basically saying: A first-order ODE is a slope field, and a solution is a curve that moves everywhere tangent to that field. The math breakdown Write the ODE as dy/dx = f(x,y). At each point (x,y) you attach a tiny line segment with slope f(x,y). A function y = y₁(x) is a solution exactly when its graph follows those slopes:. At every x, the slope of the curve equals the slope prescribed by the field at the point on the curve. That’s the single line that unifies both viewpoints: y₁′(x) = f(x, y₁(x)). So solving the ODE and drawing an integral curve are the same statement in two languages!👌🏻 Once you see that, you can stop obsessing over whether you can write y(x) in closed form. You can start asking the questions that matter: where do solutions flow, where do they get trapped, where do they blow up, and where does existence/uniqueness fail just because the field isn’t even defined? That’s the perspective shift I wish every ODE course forces early and it’s exactly why I keep pairing math with animation. #DifferentialEquations #ODEs #VectorFields #MathAnimation #Mathematics

Mathelirium

53,338 次观看 • 7 个月前

The Trap in Every Mathematics Lecture If you’ve taken a lot of math courses, you start to recognize a pattern. There’s a moment where the lecturer is warming up with the obvious stuff...add matrices entrywise, scale by α, do the row-column product...and you’re thinking, alright… where is this going? Then you relax. You stop resisting. And right there, they slip in one line that changes how you see the whole subject. When Benedict Gross says "matrices represent linear operators,"he’s telling you to stop treating a matrix as a rectangle of numbers and start treating it as an action. A linear operator is a function T: Rⁿ → Rⁿ that respects two rules: T(u+v)=T(u)+T(v) and T(αu)=αT(u). Once you pick a basis, T is completely determined by where it sends the basis vectors e₁,…,eₙ. Put T(e₁),…,T(eₙ) into columns and you get a matrix A. That is what "A represents T" means...A is the coordinate portrait of the transformation. Now the punchline that makes matrix multiplication feel inevitable. If B represents S and A represents T, then doing S first and then T is the composition T∘S. In coordinates that becomes A(Bx)=(AB)x. So multiplying matrices is really composing transformations. That’s why multiplication is usually not commutative: T∘S is generally not the same transformation as S∘T, and the matrices inherit that noncommutativity. This explains half of Linear Algebra because it tells you what the course is really about...functions that move vectors around, not grids of numbers. A matrix is just the written form of that function once you choose coordinates. Then the rules stop feeling random Multiplying matrices means doing one move and then another, an inverse means you can undo the move, eigenvectors are directions that don’t get turned, and changing basis is just describing the same move in a different language. That one idea makes a lot of linear algebra click. #LinearAlgebra #Matrices #GroupTheory #GLn #MathLectures #Mathematics

The Trap in Every Mathematics Lecture If you’ve taken a lot of math courses, you start to recognize a pattern. There’s a moment where the lecturer is warming up with the obvious stuff...add matrices entrywise, scale by α, do the row-column product...and you’re thinking, alright… where is this going? Then you relax. You stop resisting. And right there, they slip in one line that changes how you see the whole subject. When Benedict Gross says "matrices represent linear operators,"he’s telling you to stop treating a matrix as a rectangle of numbers and start treating it as an action. A linear operator is a function T: Rⁿ → Rⁿ that respects two rules: T(u+v)=T(u)+T(v) and T(αu)=αT(u). Once you pick a basis, T is completely determined by where it sends the basis vectors e₁,…,eₙ. Put T(e₁),…,T(eₙ) into columns and you get a matrix A. That is what "A represents T" means...A is the coordinate portrait of the transformation. Now the punchline that makes matrix multiplication feel inevitable. If B represents S and A represents T, then doing S first and then T is the composition T∘S. In coordinates that becomes A(Bx)=(AB)x. So multiplying matrices is really composing transformations. That’s why multiplication is usually not commutative: T∘S is generally not the same transformation as S∘T, and the matrices inherit that noncommutativity. This explains half of Linear Algebra because it tells you what the course is really about...functions that move vectors around, not grids of numbers. A matrix is just the written form of that function once you choose coordinates. Then the rules stop feeling random Multiplying matrices means doing one move and then another, an inverse means you can undo the move, eigenvectors are directions that don’t get turned, and changing basis is just describing the same move in a different language. That one idea makes a lot of linear algebra click. #LinearAlgebra #Matrices #GroupTheory #GLn #MathLectures #Mathematics

Mathelirium

66,892 次观看 • 7 个月前

The Field Learns to Sew Itself This animation uses a moving quadratic differential q(z,t)dz², where zeros and double poles steer thousands of particles along the field’s horizontal trajectories, turning the complex plane into a living fabric of mathematically guided threads.

The Field Learns to Sew Itself This animation uses a moving quadratic differential q(z,t)dz², where zeros and double poles steer thousands of particles along the field’s horizontal trajectories, turning the complex plane into a living fabric of mathematically guided threads.

Mathelirium

10,952 次观看 • 2 个月前

Lanterns on the Logarithmic Sea Zeros and poles of a complex rational function R(z,t) drift across a 3D landscape carved from the logarithmic potential U(z,t)=log|R(z,t)|. Every ridge, valley, and glowing thread comes from the moving R(z,t), while the particles follow the tangent field of its level curves. The golden lantern ovals mark the singularities directly. So, the whole scene becomes a living map of where the function vanishes, where it blows up, and how the surrounding geometry bends in response.

Lanterns on the Logarithmic Sea Zeros and poles of a complex rational function R(z,t) drift across a 3D landscape carved from the logarithmic potential U(z,t)=log|R(z,t)|. Every ridge, valley, and glowing thread comes from the moving R(z,t), while the particles follow the tangent field of its level curves. The golden lantern ovals mark the singularities directly. So, the whole scene becomes a living map of where the function vanishes, where it blows up, and how the surrounding geometry bends in response.

Mathelirium

14,941 次观看 • 2 个月前

Calculus of Variations is what happens when you stop optimizing values and start optimizing geometries. The unknown isn’t a single x...it’s a whole curve y(x). And the thing you’re minimizing usually isn’t a formula you can eyeball...it’s an integral that judges the entire shape. For our first lecture, we look at the famous Brachistochrone problem. Fix two points, switch on gravity, and ask a question that sounds too simple...which track gets a bead from A to B in the least time? Your intuition will betray you on the first try. It’s not the straight line. It’s not the drop hard then cruise sketch either. The winner is a cycloid...the curve traced by a point on a rolling circle. In the animation, the track is the moving character. We start with an imperfect curve, run gradient descent in curve-space, and watch the geometry reshape frame by frame as T[y] collapses until it locks into the brachistochrone. Pls see the comment below for the math breakdown. #CalculusOfVariations #Brachistochrone #Cycloid #Physics #Optimization #Mathematics

Calculus of Variations is what happens when you stop optimizing values and start optimizing geometries. The unknown isn’t a single x...it’s a whole curve y(x). And the thing you’re minimizing usually isn’t a formula you can eyeball...it’s an integral that judges the entire shape. For our first lecture, we look at the famous Brachistochrone problem. Fix two points, switch on gravity, and ask a question that sounds too simple...which track gets a bead from A to B in the least time? Your intuition will betray you on the first try. It’s not the straight line. It’s not the drop hard then cruise sketch either. The winner is a cycloid...the curve traced by a point on a rolling circle. In the animation, the track is the moving character. We start with an imperfect curve, run gradient descent in curve-space, and watch the geometry reshape frame by frame as T[y] collapses until it locks into the brachistochrone. Pls see the comment below for the math breakdown. #CalculusOfVariations #Brachistochrone #Cycloid #Physics #Optimization #Mathematics

Mathelirium

106,981 次观看 • 8 个月前