Видео

Very Good

Very good presentation

Thank you sir

Thanks a lot sir

Superrrr sir🎉❤

❤

🔥

Thank you for teaching this topic easy sir .

Nice 🎉

Very good 🎉

Super🎉

très bonne explication. merci.

why we find the height of a.numbers and polynomials, and what actually represents height w.r.t geometrically and algebraically?

Where are parts 1/2 available,please?

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

why is blackboard so distance? we cannot see what the professor is writing. Please in the nexts classes put the camera near the professor.

Super

Could anyone share the bibliography list of this course please? Thank you.

Exceptional

👏👏👏

Interesting topic, horrendous sound quality. ):

Make path graph of order 4 the choose any single vertex in resolving set then multiple vertices and edges have same reputation as v2 and e2 and so on😂

There is no any graph with mixex metric dimension

افتخار ملکان سربلندی وآرامش نصیبتان باد

Très grand et brillant professeur. J'ai eu le goût de l'algèbre flou et ses applications grâce a vos enseignements. Merci Professeur

Ce sont les THEORISMES qui gouvernent le monde, mais pas les mathématiques. Sans les THEORISMES (les constructions mentales, les concepts, les idées, les brevets, les inventions, etc.) tu ne peux pas vivre car tu ne peux tout simplement pas comprendre le monde qui t'entoure. Au quotidien 99,99 % des gens n'utilisent quasiment "jamais" les maths. Les premiers humains (et les nourrissons aujourd'hui) ne connaissaient pas les mathématiques pourtant ils pouvaient s'adapter au quotidien. Les math ça sert à "quantifier les théorismes" mais ça ne sert pas à les découvrir (sauf exceptions). C'est pour cela que les mathématiques n'auront jamais la puissance explicative des théorismes. Les grands génies sont les théoristes (Léonard de Vinci, Robert Hooke, Darwin, etc.) qui n'étaient pas mathématiciens. Par contre les grands mathématiciens ne sont "jamais" (sauf exceptions) de grands théoriciens du calibre de Vinci, Hooke et Darwin. Ce ne sont pas les mathématiques qui sont efficaces mais les théorismes qu'elles quantifient. Guy Patel ; expansologue, coopérologue, intellectuologue.

Thank you Very much professor. Actually this was much needed to clarify my understanding.

My degree work is based on this theory, how could one apply the orbit theory to this?

I always love your lecture sir. Very articulate

Play gamer nova empire @

Noether symmetry in minkoaski space time in bianchi type 1 ki lectures video ki link sir send kar di

Respectful professor, I do not believe we can use Holder's inequality!

Thanks a lot for these videos. By the way, this sequence on spaces of holomorphic functions look a lot like ahlfors's book on complex analysis. I'll use this videos to help understand ahlfors one, is that a good strategy?

The quadratic formula is wrong. Should have been a/2±√((a/2)²-b)

bonjour prof pourqoi exist une plongement entre Cp et C le corps des nombers complexe si il to plait donner une reponce plus detail et merci

Really interesting

"One Hour Crash Course in Complex Analysis" WOW!

wonderful lecture, Michel

Thanks, very clearly

good sir

Can you upload the lecture of Knot theory

Congrats! 🎉😊

❤️❤️💕

That's great

Sir! You are my ideal in comsats university Lahore ❤

Thanks.

This lecture has been very helpful in my undergrad studies. Thank you Prof. Fernández and CIMPA! 🙏

Notes seem to be available here: math.ac.vn/conference/CIMPA2021/images/DiophantineGeometry.pdf

I love the Inonesia take on the blackboard, that had me laughing. Very clear lecture otherwise.

P'(Z) doesn't look doubly periodic. P(Z) does looks doubly petiodic.