Which Famous Math Trio is Best?

Comments · 696

• WR

  @WrathofMath · 1 year ago · pinned

  parents covered up an accidental death, unsure, succumbed to the elements, what do you think?<br><br>Join Wrath of Math to get exclusive videos, lecture notes, and more:<br><a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyEKvaxi8mt9FMc62MHcliw/join">https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyEKvaxi8mt9FMc62MHcliw/join</a><br><br>Check out the coolest math clothes in the world: <a href="https://mathshion.com/">https://mathshion.com/</a>

  41

• OC

  @ocessionaryy · 1 year ago

  this isn&apos;t even a debate. it&apos;s x, y, and z. iconic to people who know little math and lots of math, and useful almost no matter what you&apos;re doing.

  406

• SA

  @SakshamG7 · 1 year ago

  Alpha, beta, gamma too

  606

• FR

  @Fruitiv · 1 year ago

  Sin, Cos, Tan

  460

• GE

  @gerarddip · 11 months ago (edited)

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA1qChOMcac&amp;t=26">0:26</a> worst ai generated book cover ever lmaooo

  93

• SA

  @SakshamG7 · 1 year ago

  e, pi, and i

  358

• TH

  @thomasw.trelenberg414 · 1 year ago

  As a physicist, i, j, k as three-space unit vectors was what came to mind first. &nbsp;Along that vein, r, theta, phi as spherical coordinate unit vectors would be another famous triple...😁

  181

• M.

  @m.z.2466 · 1 year ago

  you just gave most programmers a heart attack when you indexed the arrays starting with 1 instead of 0

  18

• CA

  @cartermikovich1369 · 1 year ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA1qChOMcac&amp;t=764">12:44</a> “a matrix- 🤖 is a rectangular 🤖 array 🤖 of numbers”

  50

• LO

  @lovelylovelylovevg · 1 year ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA1qChOMcac&amp;t=27">0:27</a> Math sorcerer ai book callout is so funny XD

  9

• BO

  @Bodyknock · 1 year ago

  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA1qChOMcac&amp;t=1010">16:50</a> For anybody who didn’t get the joke, there is no general consensus about whether or not to include 0 as a Natural Number. Whether it is or not entirely depends on the individual context someone is using them and whether or not they think including 0 makes things work out more or less neatly. <br><br>For example, if you’re working from a set theory underpinning, then the Natural Numbers are the set of possible sizes of finite sets. And since the Empty Set is a finite set of size 0, that means 0 is a Natural Number in that setting. So any time you’re talking about sizes of sets or number of orderings or combinations of elements in sets, etc, you’re probably going to be including 0 in the Naturals.<br><br>On the other hand, when you’re working in Number Theory, you’re often dealing with factors and prime factors of numbers, and 0 is a weird corner case in that setting because every integer divides it and it divides no integer. So often 0 will be excluded from the Natural Numbers in that context for convenience so you don’t constantly have to say “such and such is true for all Natural Numbers except 0”. <br><br>So yeah, TLDR, he’s joking when he says there’s absolutely no disagreement about 0 not being a Natural Number. 😄

  81

• MA

  @matematixyt · 1 year ago

  saw &quot;ijk&quot; in the thumbnail and was fully expecting &quot;square roots of -1 in quaternions&quot; or something

  96