this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023

584 points (97.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

44061 readers

1090 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)

Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.

Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.

Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.

Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.

Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.

Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.

Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.

Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.

Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.

Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

584

What are the most mindblowing things in mathematics? (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by cll7793@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world

196 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What concepts or facts do you know from math that is mind blowing, awesome, or simply fascinating?

Here are some I would like to share:

Gödel's incompleteness theorems: There are some problems in math so difficult that it can never be solved no matter how much time you put into it.
Halting problem: It is impossible to write a program that can figure out whether or not any input program loops forever or finishes running. (Undecidablity)

The Busy Beaver function

Now this is the mind blowing one. What is the largest non-infinite number you know? Graham's Number? TREE(3)? TREE(TREE(3))? This one will beat it easily.

The Busy Beaver function produces the fastest growing number that is theoretically possible. These numbers are so large we don't even know if you can compute the function to get the value even with an infinitely powerful PC.
In fact, just the mere act of being able to compute the value would mean solving the hardest problems in mathematics.
Σ(1) = 1
Σ(4) = 13
Σ(6) > 10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10 (10s are stacked on each other)
Σ(17) > Graham's Number
Σ(27) If you can compute this function the Goldbach conjecture is false.
Σ(744) If you can compute this function the Riemann hypothesis is false.

Sources:

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] BitSound@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Not so much a fact, but I've always liked the prime spirals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulam_spiral

Also, not as impressive as the busy beaver, but Knuth's up-arrow notation is cool: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth%27s_up-arrow_notation

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I heard that Pythagoras killed a man on a fishing trip because he solved a problem first.

That's a pretty wild math tale!

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] cia@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The Julia and Mandelbrot sets always get me. That such a complex structure could arise from such simple rules. Here's a brilliant explanation I found years back: https://www.karlsims.com/julia.html

[–] GooseFinger@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The Banach - Tarski Theorm is up there. Basically, a solid ball can be broken down into infinitely many points and rotated in such a way that that a copy of the original ball is produced. Duplication is mathematically sound! But physically impossible.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox

[–] sneezycat@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

Duplication is mathematically sound!

Only if you accept the axiom of choice :P

[–] Cobrachickenwing@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

How Gauss was able to solve 1+2+3...+99+100 in the span of minutes. It really shows you can solve math problems by thinking in different ways and approaches.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Non-Euclidean geometry.

A triangle with three right angles (spherical).

A triangle whose sides are all infinite, whose angles are zero, and whose area is finite (hyperbolic).

I discovered this world 16 years ago - I'm still exploring the rabbit hole.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] zenharbinger@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

There are more infinite real numbers between 0 and 1 than whole numbers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countable_set

[–] nx@kbin.ectolab.net 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The 196,883-dimensional monster number (808,017,424,794,512,875,886,459,904,961,710,757,005,754,368,000,000,000 ≈ 8×10^53) is fascinating and mind-boggling. It's about symmetry groups.

There is a good YouTube video explaining it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH0oCDa74tE

[–] SamSpudd@lemmy.lukeog.com 8 points 2 years ago

As someone who took maths in university for two years, this has successfully given me PTSD, well done Lemmy.

[–] AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

The fact that complex numbers allow you to get a much more accurate approximation of the derivative than classical finite difference at almost no extra cost under suitable conditions while also suffering way less from roundoff errors when implemented in finite precision:

$\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\,{\mathrm{Im}}\left[ f(x+i\,\varepsilon) \right] = f'(x) + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2)$

(x and epsilon are real numbers and f is assumed to be an analytic extension of some real function)

Higher-order derivatives can also be obtained using hypercomplex numbers.

Another related and similarly beautiful result is Cauchy's integral formula which allows you to compute derivatives via integration.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] problematicPanther@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (9 children)

The Monty hall problem makes me irrationally angry.

load more comments (9 replies)

[+] TheGiantKorean@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] Badland9085@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You are correct. This notion of “size” of sets is called “cardinality”. For two sets to have the same “size” is to have the same cardinality.

The set of natural numbers (whole, counting numbers, starting from either 0 or 1, depending on which field you’re in) and the integers have the same cardinality. They also have the same cardinality as the rational numbers, numbers that can be written as a fraction of integers. However, none of these have the same cardinality as the reals, and the way to prove that is through Cantor’s well-known Diagonal Argument.

Another interesting thing that makes integers and rationals different, despite them having the same cardinality, is that the rationals are “dense” in the reals. What “rationals are dense in the reals” means is that if you take any two real numbers, you can always find a rational number between them. This is, however, not true for integers. Pretty fascinating, since this shows that the intuitive notion of “relative size” actually captures the idea of, in this case, distance, aka a metric. Cardinality is thus defined to remove that notion.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] keenanpepper@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

One thing that definitely feels like "magic" is Monstrous Moonshine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monstrous_moonshine) and stuff related to the j-invariant e.g. the fact that exp(pi*sqrt(163)) is so close to an integer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heegner_number#Almost_integers_and_Ramanujan.27s_constant). I hardly understand it at all but it seems mind-blowing to me, almost in a suspicious way.

[–] theodewere@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago

Incompleteness is great.. internal consistency is incompatible with universality.. goes hand in hand with Relativity.. they both are trying to lift us toward higher dimensional understanding..

[–] mathemachristian@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago

Szemeredis regularity lemma is really cool. Basically if you desire a certain structure in your graph, you just have to make it really really (really) big and then you're sure to find it. Or in other words you can find a really regular graph up to any positive error percentage as long as you make it really really (really really) big.

[–] Artisian@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

An arithmetic miracle:

Let's define a sequence. We will start with 1 and 1.

To get the next number, square the last, add 1, and divide by the second to last. a(n+1) = ( a(n)^2 +1 )/ a(n-1) So the fourth number is (2*2+1)/1 =5, while the next is (25+1)/2 = 13. The sequence is thus:

1, 1, 2, 5, 13, 34, ...

If you keep computing (the numbers get large) you'll see that every time we get an integer. But every step involves a division! Usually dividing things gives fractions.

This last is called the somos sequence, and it shows up in fairly deep algebra.

load more comments