Why don't we use this method to multiply numbers in processors? To the best of my understanding the "mult" function is repeated addition, why not use this configuration of wires and put "and" gates at the junctions and connect the outputs to full adders with the carry out's connected?
I love this. Made perfect sense to me. Everyone learns differently. Some people are more visual. Both methods should be taught in schools so that both kinds of learning can be fully utilized and understood :) This can bring the "fun" back into math for the visual types. Nice work!
Excellent explanation. This so-called "trick" is just a pictorial representation of exactly how we do multiplication, except it's inefficient and cumbersome. Anyone who thinks otherwise, do something simple like 67 X 88 both ways.
I think the ten to the power technique at 4min in might just confuse a beginner, seems easier to start right to left with counting up, also mentioning the rotation of the grid would make it clearer about how the alignment of the intersections adds up.
In base 10 arithmetics, all natural numbers can be written as sums of powers of 10. Consider: 21 x 13 = (2*10^1 + 1*10^0) x (1*10^1 + 3*10^0) All those intersections actually represent all the possible products of powers of 10 that can be found in the parentheses. 2 terms in the 1st multiplied by 2 terms in the second, total 4 which is the number of the "corners" of that rectangle. The number of intersections at each corner is the coefficient product. So it appears different but it is not.
I thought the base 6 part was the best part of the video, precisely for that reason mentioned, that it is hard to forget your base 10 multiplication facts.
I don't necessarily grasp that either (and maybe it is just me) but I do not understand how you divide out each intersection and count "only" those in those intersections? How you set up the intersections and then count them is understood, it is just how you are partioning those out is fuzzy. Thank you
@3der3 You'd just put a single line in the hundreds place, just like "100" has a single 1 in the hundreds place. The problem with the visual method is that it lacks a placeholder (like the zeros in 100), so you really have to be careful lining things up.
In fact a combination of values and number of values e.g 2 x 3 H for 2 ones x 3 hundreds where it appears shall make the abstract method become tangible hence more understandable by the new learner.
There just wouldn't be any lines there. You'd just know that the huge space you leave is meant to be blank. So, it's be a set of four lines, a large space, and a set of seven lines; and across them at the left side would be a set of three lines.
Nice work, thanks for the clear explanation, this process has interested me for a while. By the way, what did you use in order to create this video? It's gorgeous.
Let me tell you something Mr.Chris Lusto Basically Vedic is the language of the Vedas, whereas an early form of Sanskrit Language which belongs to India .The method you've shown to multiply is not Chinese or Japanese It's ancient Indian Method of multiplication
@FreshPrinceness The nice thing about this method (or the partial products algorithm, for that matter), is that it makes absolutely no difference where you start. Just pick a place value and count the intersections. The numbers will line up, regardless.
@numbcore That's actually a great idea. A few people have had questions about how to deal with "empty" spaces in the figure, and I think the dotted line would work very nicely as a placeholder.
And there is also a mistake in base 6 that makes it confusing: The second column does not correspond to 10^1 in base six it corresponds to the 6^1 column, and then the 6²... and so on. So the given answer - which is correct - is equal to: 1133=1*6³+1*6²+3*6+3=(base 10) 216+36+18+3=273
Hi good day. I get it already the solution, but when i try to solve this 24x25 ?i cannot solve with this solution? Can please show me how i get the correct answer with same solution. Thank you. Godbless.
Both, for 321 x 123, red and green is still 100's x 1's which = hundreds, and yellow and yellow is still 10's x 10's which is also hundreds. So, it is a combination of both, but still easier than how I learned my multiplications in school. I'm more of a visual learner, so this would have been very helpful to visual learners. And I was pretty good at maths, so this should be really helpful for everyone.
Nice lesson delivery. Really well presented. Its a very weird method. Would be good for some situations but not for others. depends how your brain works. thanks
@MrHn9296 You would just have to leave an empty space where the "zero line" would be, since that multiplication must result in 0 intersections. It's pretty much the same way we deal with that in numerals, except we have this nifty 0 symbol to use as a placeholder. If you want to improve this process, you could invent a placeholder symbol of your own for Vedic multiplication. Actually, that's a pretty good idea.
This method is so awesome for small kids but I won't let my son watch you do it. Dude, you made my head swim for a minute there. I know your doing place value but you make it sound sooo much harder than what it is. The point is it's as easy as literally counting dots. Common Core sucks so bad!
I don't know the indian number system but the Japanese number system is founded on this method. Like how we say 1 hundred, 1 thousand, 1 million; they say 1 thousand, 1 ten-thousand, 1 hundred-million; except their words for ten-thousand and hundred-million don't contain the words for ten, hundred, thousand, million; they are their own word/unit. As you can see with this method, as you increase the number of digits being multiplied, the far left unit goes from ones -> tens -> hundreds -> thousands -> ten-thousands -> and a fourth digit would make it hundred-millions which matches up with their number system.
completely agree. This is only useful if you don't know how to multiply at all and only know how to add. And even then only for relatively small digits (try this with 9879, you'll be drawing and counting all day). If you know simple one-digit calculation, just do what most learn in (western) schools: 123 x 321 = ... 369 _246 __123 ------------- (addition per column, bring "1" of 14 one column left) 39483
I've had just seen the original video and my comment was they are teaching a trick not a skill, but the way you explain it may help understand the math facts behind the method.
Federico Robledo this. I don't know about other countries but the technique is pretty much exactly how Math was taught in my school (just without the lines which is the same when it comes to calculating using only your head). It's just divide & conquer which is a basic trick to master difficult tasks without much effort.
I made it easier by just adding up the cross sections and putting the values in from how they should look... eg 21x 18 = somewhere around 300 and y0u work the digits around there to get 378
Jyn Meyer what do you mean? You just add all the intersections and get 72, the thing is that with many lines (5 or more) this method is a pain in the a**
I literally Forgot Maths after Japanese way of multiplication .Lol what's the answer you get If you multiply 39X43 it's 1677 not your weird answer . There are thousand ways and methods to calculate a problem but the solution we get should be same ..
Talking about place values may help some kids understand this strategy. I call it hashtag maths as kids are used to # things. Sometimes it is a good way of looking at number relationships.
You managed to take a genius simple math trick and make it tons harder by your over explanation and base6'es and hundreds of thousands etc ... You are making it much harder than it is, sorry to say .. good video though...
It is in fact Chinese. The original video on the web was uploaded in Nov 2006. It had been taught to the guy by his Chinese girlfriend. The criss-cross reminded the students of the stools they sat on in class.
Vedic multiplication actually comes from India. The Vedas are a very integrals part fo the country's culture, tradition, foundations of religion and also education
So this comment of yours is from 3 years ago so I don't blame you if you don't see my reply, but Chris actually did (In the description) say that it was a Vedic multiplication algorithm as well as in the video stating that it wasn't actually Japanese. Or I just got r/wooooshed. It's cool that you knew that though. I sure didn't. ;>
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Why don't we use this method to multiply numbers in processors? To the best of my understanding the "mult" function is repeated addition, why not use this configuration of wires and put "and" gates at the junctions and connect the outputs to full adders with the carry out's connected?
I was messing around with it before i learned anything about it and actually thought up all of these things on my own. I'm quite proud. Lol
Is it a copy of "Vedic Mathematics - Ancient Indian Mathematics" in You Tube"?
I love this. Made perfect sense to me. Everyone learns differently. Some people are more visual. Both methods should be taught in schools so that both kinds of learning can be fully utilized and understood :) This can bring the "fun" back into math for the visual types. Nice work!
Excellent explanation. This so-called "trick" is just a pictorial representation of exactly how we do multiplication, except it's inefficient and cumbersome. Anyone who thinks otherwise, do something simple like 67 X 88 both ways.
I think the ten to the power technique at 4min in might just confuse a beginner, seems easier to start right to left with counting up, also mentioning the rotation of the grid would make it clearer about how the alignment of the intersections adds up.
This is awesome, should totally use this for any exams/tests I may have....
Its pretty tricky though!
DarkWarrioR Well at first it was to me but, as it went on and the numbers got bigger, I somehow understand how it went XD
In base 10 arithmetics, all natural numbers can be written as sums of powers of 10.
Consider: 21 x 13 = (2*10^1 + 1*10^0) x (1*10^1 + 3*10^0)
All those intersections actually represent all the possible products of powers of 10 that can be found in the parentheses. 2 terms in the 1st multiplied by 2 terms in the second, total 4 which is the number of the "corners" of that rectangle.
The number of intersections at each corner is the coefficient product. So it appears different but it is not.
should do a side by side comparison between that method and the normal method
TRANSPARENT, THANK YOU PROF. CHRIS LUSTO.
I thought the base 6 part was the best part of the video, precisely for that reason mentioned, that it is hard to forget your base 10 multiplication facts.
I like the style of that video. Wondering which software has been used to create it...
I don't necessarily grasp that either (and maybe it is just me) but I do not understand how you divide out each intersection and count "only" those in those intersections? How you set up the intersections and then count them is understood, it is just how you are partioning those out is fuzzy. Thank you
How to I multiply for example 12x3 with this method? I've been trying and can't seem to get the right number.
Is that base 6 stuff related to logarithms? Simone please help.
thanks for the video!
you explain maths quite clearly, have you considered doing any other videos?
I think the lines have to create a square for this method to work. What if you tried diagramming 1024 x 0305?
I still don't get how do you choose the correct intersections for every unit. LOL.
@bruinburns13 Thanks. It just uses builds and transitions in Keynote. Nothing fancy.
Great up to the base 6 calculations. That has more potential to confuse than help the matter. It should be taken out to a follow up video.
@3der3 You'd just put a single line in the hundreds place, just like "100" has a single 1 in the hundreds place. The problem with the visual method is that it lacks a placeholder (like the zeros in 100), so you really have to be careful lining things up.
In fact a combination of values and number of values e.g 2 x 3 H for 2 ones x 3 hundreds where it appears shall make the abstract method become tangible hence more understandable by the new learner.
And if the 0 is in the midle? like 1024x305 ? I tryed the dotted line but is not working
what do you do if the number is 30 or 407 ? im not quite sure what to do with the zeros
There just wouldn't be any lines there. You'd just know that the huge space you leave is meant to be blank. So, it's be a set of four lines, a large space, and a set of seven lines; and across them at the left side would be a set of three lines.
do a zero line (looking different 2 the others) and any dots made by it don't count.
i have a question , how to represent the Zero in the lines ??
dude nice chalkboard, where/what program or image is that?
It can, just add a zero before 2 (02) to multiply is by ten, and use numbcore's idea to place a dotted line to represent the zero.
Nice work, thanks for the clear explanation, this process has interested me for a while. By the way, what did you use in order to create this video? It's gorgeous.
Let me tell you something Mr.Chris Lusto Basically Vedic is the language of the Vedas, whereas an early form of Sanskrit Language which belongs to India .The method you've shown to multiply is not Chinese or Japanese It's ancient Indian Method of multiplication
Wait, oh my gosh this is bothering me! Can you please explain why it's 20x10 becomes 200. Where did that come from? The 20 and 10! Thanks!
@FreshPrinceness The nice thing about this method (or the partial products algorithm, for that matter), is that it makes absolutely no difference where you start. Just pick a place value and count the intersections. The numbers will line up, regardless.
None of the examples involve a carry, which I believe makes this more complex than it initially appears.
Hey Chris, What software did you use to create the video?
how do you multiply 302*4001=?
@numbcore That's actually a great idea. A few people have had questions about how to deal with "empty" spaces in the figure, and I think the dotted line would work very nicely as a placeholder.
And there is also a mistake in base 6 that makes it confusing: The second column does not correspond to 10^1 in base six it corresponds to the 6^1 column, and then the 6²... and so on. So the given answer - which is correct - is equal to: 1133=1*6³+1*6²+3*6+3=(base 10) 216+36+18+3=273
Chris, Why is called "Vedic"? Did it originate there?
But how do i make it with a 100?
No line for the 0?
wait im still confused....where would that go? say its 12 X 100, how would that work?
Hi good day. I get it already the solution, but when i try to solve this 24x25 ?i cannot solve with this solution? Can please show me how i get the correct answer with same solution. Thank you. Godbless.
Is this also possible with four digits?
so are we using visual , not mathematical thinking ?
Both, for 321 x 123, red and green is still 100's x 1's which = hundreds, and yellow and yellow is still 10's x 10's which is also hundreds. So, it is a combination of both, but still easier than how I learned my multiplications in school. I'm more of a visual learner, so this would have been very helpful to visual learners. And I was pretty good at maths, so this should be really helpful for everyone.
This is incredible and perfectly explained. Great job
if you have 301 x 301 .. for example..what do you do ? :D
Nice lesson delivery. Really well presented. Its a very weird method. Would be good for some situations but not for others. depends how your brain works. thanks
Very clean video, well done!
@MrHn9296 You would just have to leave an empty space where the "zero line" would be, since that multiplication must result in 0 intersections. It's pretty much the same way we deal with that in numerals, except we have this nifty 0 symbol to use as a placeholder. If you want to improve this process, you could invent a placeholder symbol of your own for Vedic multiplication. Actually, that's a pretty good idea.
if so calculates Japanese how many sheets of notebook spoiled :)))
hello can we make division whit this technic
it seems like when you get to higher numbers, like example 3 (123x321) it seems like it is more difficult and confusing than multiplying in your head!
This method is so awesome for small kids but I won't let my son watch you do it. Dude, you made my head swim for a minute there. I know your doing place value but you make it sound sooo much harder than what it is. The point is it's as easy as literally counting dots. Common Core sucks so bad!
I don't know the indian number system but the Japanese number system is founded on this method. Like how we say 1 hundred, 1 thousand, 1 million; they say 1 thousand, 1 ten-thousand, 1 hundred-million; except their words for ten-thousand and hundred-million don't contain the words for ten, hundred, thousand, million; they are their own word/unit. As you can see with this method, as you increase the number of digits being multiplied, the far left unit goes from ones -> tens -> hundreds -> thousands -> ten-thousands -> and a fourth digit would make it hundred-millions which matches up with their number system.
completely agree. This is only useful if you don't know how to multiply at all and only know how to add. And even then only for relatively small digits (try this with 9879, you'll be drawing and counting all day).
If you know simple one-digit calculation, just do what most learn in (western) schools:
123 x 321 = ...
369
_246
__123
------------- (addition per column, bring "1" of 14 one column left)
39483
Could you over complicate this for me a little further please?
THIS. IS. BRILLIANT!!
Thank you for making this video, I really enjoyed it!
I've had just seen the original video and my comment was they are teaching a trick not a skill, but the way you explain it may help understand the math facts behind the method.
Federico Robledo this. I don't know about other countries but the technique is pretty much exactly how Math was taught in my school (just without the lines which is the same when it comes to calculating using only your head). It's just divide & conquer which is a basic trick to master difficult tasks without much effort.
I made it easier by just adding up the cross sections and putting the values in from how they should look... eg 21x 18 = somewhere around 300 and y0u work the digits around there to get 378
Notice how all these videos use small numbers. What about 99 x 87 ? 987 x 569. Am I meant to draw 9 lines for 9?!
Good stuff Chris.
Thanks!
the trick is cool and shit but it becomes hard to keep track of the dots in groups when the digits are larger than 4..
My only issue is how do you do this with 8 or 9?
like 8 x 9? draw 8 lines crossing 9 lines and count. you'll get 72 intersecting areas.
But there will be multiples to add up since there will be 3 numbers left at the bottom, right?
Jyn Meyer what do you mean? You just add all the intersections and get 72, the thing is that with many lines (5 or more) this method is a pain in the a**
Don't know how ya got that. There's 24 lines intersecting just on the right side. 1 on the left and 10 in the center.
Thanks so much - great explanation!
This is a good method but for the purpose of understanding multiplication values needed to be included.
I am Japanese, but I have never used such way to multiply.
Japanese people do multiplication like this:
39
x 43
--------
117
147
--------
1587
I literally Forgot Maths after Japanese way of multiplication .Lol what's the answer you get If you multiply 39X43 it's 1677 not your weird answer . There are thousand ways and methods to calculate a problem but the solution we get should be same ..
Sorry, the fourth roe must be 39X4 so 156. It is my mistake.
No Worries ....
We do so in Sweden im almost 13 years old
not accurate
That makes so much sense Thank you
explain 18x18 please
what about 76* 87*67
clever. Thanks for sharing
How come everyone who demos this only does it with digits 3 or below? This is hardly useful if it's only applicable for those specific numbers
Thanks, Chris!
it is just a more confusing picture the bigger the numbers get, but the same method applies.
534x430?
this video won't play?!?!
what if u don't get the answer u need
This seems similar to how the abacus is used
that's nice and easy with small number digits... try it with a couple of 7, 8 or 9 and you'll count forever
Talking about place values may help some kids understand this strategy. I call it hashtag maths as kids are used to # things. Sometimes it is a good way of looking at number relationships.
Makes much more sense now.
5:12 10^0 = 1. .true you dont have any 0's but u end up with a 1 instead
you don't need to draw lines to calculate things like 8*7
If you google "vedic", the first result tells you immediately that it's of Indian origin. Nicely researched Chris Lusto.
5X0?
why didn't they teach me this in the third grade?
You managed to take a genius simple math trick and make it tons harder by your over explanation and base6'es and hundreds of thousands etc ... You are making it much harder than it is, sorry to say .. good video though...
this is indian u know.. -__- not japanese.. dunno where japanese was associated with vedic multiplication!
I learned this in elementry 5th year using just pencil and scrap paper to calculate.
It is in fact Chinese. The original video on the web was uploaded in Nov 2006. It had been taught to the guy by his Chinese girlfriend. The criss-cross reminded the students of the stools they sat on in class.
Vedic multiplication actually comes from India. The Vedas are a very integrals part fo the country's culture, tradition, foundations of religion and also education
try using digits 7,8,9
This is the real japanese multiplication or no?
I am a Japanese, but I did not know how to calculate. :-(
This is Vedic mathematics.. Not Japanese.. It was used in ancient India.
So this comment of yours is from 3 years ago so I don't blame you if you don't see my reply, but Chris actually did (In the description) say that it was a Vedic multiplication algorithm as well as in the video stating that it wasn't actually Japanese.
Or I just got r/wooooshed.
It's cool that you knew that though. I sure didn't. ;>
this muliplication only works on the exact numberss tht are given as examples
This is the calculation method of India.
日本でも話題にはなりましたけど・・・
Thank you for this video
Who counts in base 6? I never even HEARD of base 6!
This is awesome! :)