Introduction to number theory lecture 1.

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 12 дек 2024

Комментарии • 141

  • @Beyond_b1
    @Beyond_b1 2 года назад +448

    Richard won the fields medal in 1998 and he’s here on RUclips giving us free lectures in number theory. I earned a masters in math at Illinois state some 10 plus years ago and I literally forgot a lot coz my current work has nothing to do with the things I studied. This channel brings back a lot of memories and I have started going through my notes again. Thanks 😊

    • @Beyond_b1
      @Beyond_b1 2 года назад +8

      @@username8644 it was a struggle finding work after a pure math degree. You have to move towards data science or more applied “new sciences” like Machine learning and Artificial intelligence to get work. Do a lot of internships when offered. Also probability and statistics present better opportunities

    • @Mathin3D
      @Mathin3D 2 года назад +1

      Does not seem to be doing the best of jobs...

    • @bdpv025
      @bdpv025 2 года назад

      Im so lucky 😳

    • @wyuj888jgszpokrrtuz
      @wyuj888jgszpokrrtuz 2 года назад +1

      What is your current work?

    • @Beyond_b1
      @Beyond_b1 2 года назад +1

      @@wyuj888jgszpokrrtuz Software QA engineer.

  • @yishusong1628
    @yishusong1628 2 года назад +124

    Mediocre math professor will make a 45-min number theory intro insufferable, but masters like Prof Borcherds can make it accessible to a high schooler. Much respect.

  • @brachypelmasmith
    @brachypelmasmith 2 года назад +31

    I must say I really like this camera setup with handwriting. It makes it so much easier for the lecturer to do math.

  • @yombaboris
    @yombaboris 2 года назад +25

    Very Intresting lecture. Presented with a rare pedagogic ability and a touch of humour. Thanks Prof!

  • @renpnal229
    @renpnal229 2 года назад +45

    There's a slight error at 8:36. 2047 = 23 x 89.

  • @tszhok
    @tszhok Год назад +4

    My truest gratitude and deepest bow to Mr Borcherds (no disrespect for the title instead of Prof., Dr., etc., as all of those are still understating the greatness from yours) for the selfish-less sharing to all laymen as I am here.

  • @hymanimy
    @hymanimy 2 года назад +38

    This introductory lecture was absolutely fascinating for me as I'm only in my 2nd year of a maths degree right now. Thank you for this.

    • @piotrskalski1477
      @piotrskalski1477 Год назад +1

      Is it a good idea to spend time watching this series? I'm currently on 1st year math

    • @3rdDegree_
      @3rdDegree_ Год назад

      @@piotrskalski1477honestly watch you want to, time spent practicing math is time spent practicing math

    • @Wutheheooooo
      @Wutheheooooo 4 месяца назад

      ​@@piotrskalski1477you decide

  • @hausdorffm
    @hausdorffm 2 года назад +32

    How do you find primes?
    Eratosthenes algorithm
    How many primes are there.
    Euclid Theorem: For any finite set of primes, there is a new prime which is not in the set.
    Proof: In fact, for the set of primes I = {p_1,...,p_n}, any prime factor of the number
    p_1*...*p_n + 1 gives such a new prime p_{n+1}, i.e., p_1*...*p_n + 1 = p_{n+1}*Q for some Q.
    In fact, suppose contrary that p_[n+1} is in I, then 1 is decomposed.
    (E.g., if p_[n+1} = p_1, then p_1*...*p_n + 1 = p_{n+1}*Q = p_1*Q, so 1 = p_1*(p_2*...*p_n + Q).)
    So it contradicts.
    Example, For a set of primes {3,5}, we can find a new prime as a factor of 3*5 +1 (= 2^3), so we get a prime 2 as a new prime.
    Mersenne prime: If 2^n -1 is prime, then n is prime.
    Proof. If n is not prime, then 2^n -1 is also not prime.
    In fact, 2^{ab} -1 = (2^a-1)(2~{ab-a} + ...+1), I am not sure.
    Fermat number: 2^n + 1, 2^2^m + 1
    Open question: Are there infinite prime numbers of the form 2^n + 1, 2^2^m + 1??
    Gauss discovered that if the number of sides of polygon is Fermat prime, then the polygon can be draw by ruler and compass.
    Proposition. There are no polynomials f(n) so that its value is always prime for natural number.
    In fact, let f(n) be a polynomial and suppose that f(0) = k >1, then f(k) is divided by k.
    In case of f(0) = 1, by considering f(n+k), we can reduce it to f(0) > 1.
    So it does not seem to be a simple way to generate primes.
    How many primes are there less than x?
    Gauss Pi(x) =~ x/ log(x)
    Informally,
    Chance of n being prime ~ 1/ log(n)
    Chance of 2^n-1 begin prime ~ 1/ log(2^n-1) = k/n
    :
    For 2^n-2, probability argument is also available but 2^n-2 is not prime for all n, so probability argument is sometimes ...
    23:44 Riemann
    Li(x) = logarithm integral of x = integral of 1/log(x) which diverge at x = 1...
    Pi'(x) is new for me.
    Pi'(x) # prime number being less than x in which p^n counts as 1/n
    Pi'(10) = # prime number being less than 10 (p^n counts as 1/n)
    = #{ 2,3,5,7 } + #{ 4,9 }
    = 4 + 2*(1/2) = 5 ??
    Pi'(x) can be represented by Li(x) and zeros of Riemann zeta function.
    31:50 In product representation of zeta function, he showed how to find (1/90)^s in the product and at the calculation he forgot "to the s power".
    Diophantine equation
    Solutions of integers for equations
    such as x^2+y^2 = z^2, 27x+11y = 1, x^4+y^4+z^4 = t^4,
    x^2=61y^2+1,....
    Hilbert's 10th problem: Is there an algorithm to solve all diophantine equations?
    Answer: No Possible in general by Robinson, et al.

  • @shupingwang3392
    @shupingwang3392 2 года назад +18

    Thank you for your excellent lectures. These are some of the best math lectures I have heard/seen.

  • @dshabes
    @dshabes 2 года назад +8

    A correction. At 16:08 while it's correct that f(n) is now divisible by k it does not follow that it is not a prime: it can be equal to k and k might be a prime. A more precise argument would be to choose sufficiently large x such that f(x*k) is greater than k (we can always do that since highest power term will dominate the others and we presume its coefficient is positive). It's still divisible by k and now we know it is not a prime since it is larger than k.

  • @ricardodelgado7042
    @ricardodelgado7042 2 года назад +7

    Currently taking this course, I'm so excited!

  • @toddtrimble2555
    @toddtrimble2555 2 года назад +26

    n^2 + n + 41 is prime up to n = 39, but 40^2 + 40 + 41 is divisible by 41.

    • @ingiford175
      @ingiford175 10 месяцев назад +2

      Can be quickly shown by:
      40^2 + 40 + 41 = 40 (40 + 1) + 41 = 40 * 41 + 41 = 41 ( 40 +1) = 41^2
      I read somewhere that the equations such as the one above that produce a lot of primes are tied to another field. But I can not remember the actual relation

    • @toddtrimble2555
      @toddtrimble2555 10 месяцев назад +1

      @@ingiford175 FWIW, it has to do with so-called Heegner numbers and the values of the j-function (not my area however). Wikipedia has a little bit: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heegner_number#Consecutive_primes

    • @ingiford175
      @ingiford175 10 месяцев назад +1

      @@toddtrimble2555 That was the exact page I was at like 3-4 years ago. Thanks.

  • @xiaohuwang4173
    @xiaohuwang4173 2 года назад +15

    Minor correction at 10:34: the condition should be "b odd" instead of "a odd"

    • @tahminatabassum9454
      @tahminatabassum9454 2 года назад +1

      Thank you, I was also looking at it.
      Or instead, professor Borcherds could correct it like if a is odd then 2^(ab)+1 is divisible by (2(^b) + 1).

    • @sahil___jakhar
      @sahil___jakhar 2 года назад

      @@tahminatabassum9454 yeah same here I am also looking for this

    • @yannicko.5936
      @yannicko.5936 Год назад

      still do not see it. If b is odd then we have 2^(ab)+1 = 2^(a(2k+1)) + 1 = (2^2ka )* (2^a) + 1 is not divisible by 2^a + 1. Where am i wrong?

    • @xiaohuwang4173
      @xiaohuwang4173 Год назад +2

      ​@@yannicko.5936So, I suppose you might already know that x-y divides x^n-y^n whenever n is a positive integer. If n happens to be odd, then it also holds that x+y divides x^n+y^n, because you can write x+y as x-(-y) and x^n+y^n as x^n-(-y)^n. And that's almost it: let n:=b, x:=2^a and y:=1 in the above divisibility rule, and you get that 2^a+1 divides (2^a)^b+1^b=2^(ab)+1 whenever b is odd.

    • @ronaldc8634
      @ronaldc8634 4 месяца назад

      Thanks, I was looking for this comment.

  • @leonardeuler6170
    @leonardeuler6170 2 года назад +20

    Just a minor correction. At 15:23 the polynomial is not prime at n = 40.

    • @Nathan-157-cn8gp
      @Nathan-157-cn8gp Год назад

      Was gonna say, n=41 is definitely a prime. thx for the clarification.

  • @anubhavtiwari6429
    @anubhavtiwari6429 9 месяцев назад +10

    He is probably only field medalist whose course lectures are available here on RUclips

    • @AnushkaTiwari-o4r
      @AnushkaTiwari-o4r 3 месяца назад +2

      Have you made notes for
      this lec?

    • @anubhavtiwari6429
      @anubhavtiwari6429 3 месяца назад +1

      @@AnushkaTiwari-o4r I actually learned with the help of a book and watched lectures whenever needed .

  • @gustavobagu7156
    @gustavobagu7156 2 года назад +9

    Both, "a" and "b" need be odd for the numerator to be divisible by 2^a+1

    • @jehovah0121
      @jehovah0121 11 месяцев назад +1

      Seems it's sufficient to let b be odd, Since 2^(ab) + 1 = (2^a + 1 - 1)^b = K(2^a + 1) - (-1)^b + 1. It's equivalent to (-1)^b + 1 mod (2^a + 1).

    • @Arch009
      @Arch009 10 месяцев назад

      @@jehovah0121 yep absolutely, its sufficient to just let b be odd!

  • @mariotabali2603
    @mariotabali2603 7 месяцев назад +1

    I was following his course on Abstract Algebra and my reaction was 'wooh old fella can teach, at last a good algebra course'. Old fella on YT happens to have a Fields Medal, I feel very ashamed, but thankful nonetheless

  • @fortyacres
    @fortyacres 2 месяца назад +1

    took abstract algebra with him many years ago at Berkeley.

  • @diribigal
    @diribigal 2 года назад +9

    I had a little chuckle at "0 and 1 are not prime because 0 is zero and 1 is a unit [a divisor of one]"

  • @sachalucienmoserferreira2233
    @sachalucienmoserferreira2233 2 года назад +2

    Thanks for sharing your knlowledgement with us. Hugs from Brazil

  • @diegoporras7769
    @diegoporras7769 2 года назад +6

    Great lecture! I wanted to get a good intro to number theory since I want to study cryptography in more detail. This was a very engaging presentation!
    Thanks!

  • @MrKidgavilan
    @MrKidgavilan 2 года назад +1

    I remember my class of elementary theory of numbers was the first part of the modern abstract algebra course; it began with the definition of divilibility and then developed propositions related to linear combinations of product of numbers; there was an order in the discussion. Here, we go from classical theory of numbers to quickly use analisis for theory of numbers... no good for a first class...

  • @ttd972
    @ttd972 2 года назад +4

    The part at 10:40 is really not clear to me, even if I "think about it a bit". Can someone please explain why 2^(ab)+1 is composite for odd a?

    • @Arch009
      @Arch009 10 месяцев назад +3

      Well, you see, a+b divides a^n + b^n for all odd n natural numbers... thus you can set b =1, and a = 2^b then you will get 2^b + 1 divides 2^ab + 1 so it becomes composite...

  • @bobbobson6867
    @bobbobson6867 2 года назад +23

    "Solving the Riemann Hypothesis is the easy bit - getting someone to read your proof is the hard part!" 😂😂😂😂 Sounds like a Douglas Adams joke. 😂😂

  • @varavictoriyarani1345
    @varavictoriyarani1345 20 дней назад +1

    If 2x+1 is not divisible by three then 2x+1 is a prime number

  • @alan2here
    @alan2here 2 года назад +1

    That looks like it generalises to:
    Positive integers are "1 over their factor count" of a prime, so 11 is half a prime, and 12 is 1/6 of a prime :)

  • @nneisler
    @nneisler 2 года назад +1

    Nice. Gotta hop on this while it’s FRESH

  • @SaveSoilSaveSoil
    @SaveSoilSaveSoil 2 года назад +3

    Thank you very much professor!

  • @Iearnwithme
    @Iearnwithme 2 года назад +2

    Minor correction at 9:00 is that 2^11 -1 = 2047 = 23*89, doesn't change the sentiment though!

  • @onlineTutorHouse
    @onlineTutorHouse 7 месяцев назад +1

    has anyone tried the Lagrange interpolation to find the "prime polynomial" ??

  • @kyleheaser2385
    @kyleheaser2385 2 месяца назад

    at 1:27 Mr Borcherds says "...1 is a unit..." Can someone expand on this idea?

  • @hengzhou4566
    @hengzhou4566 2 года назад +1

    Many universities should've used these videos for undergraduate courses. But, they have to let their own professors give lectures so that these professors can make a livelihood, but students have to bear the poor education they received.

  • @kruksog
    @kruksog 2 года назад +8

    My university had number theory (same textbook) as a 300 level course... ouch.

  • @pupfer
    @pupfer 2 года назад +1

    Why are some videos inaccessible? It says there are 49 videos on the playlist, but only 35 are accessible. Or is it just me?
    P.S. Absolutely amazing lectures, can't stand the fact that it's not possible to watch all of them:)

    • @gummansgubbe6225
      @gummansgubbe6225 2 года назад

      I know people can produce several videos and then release them on a schedule. Looks as if this channel is releasing a new video every two days.

    • @pupfer
      @pupfer 2 года назад

      @@gummansgubbe6225 yes, i think you're right. Thank you!

  • @anindyakumarkanjilal7364
    @anindyakumarkanjilal7364 Год назад +4

    I read in class 9 , and I am preparing for IOQM . 🦖

  • @vee__7
    @vee__7 2 года назад +1

    Does this course get as far as the riemann zeta fn and stuff like that?

  • @mazevedo7778
    @mazevedo7778 2 года назад +3

    Fermat saw that shit got so mad and said nah it only generates primes

  • @YoussefMahmoud_1998
    @YoussefMahmoud_1998 4 месяца назад

    What about Shor's algorithm?

  • @henleycheung3615
    @henleycheung3615 2 года назад +2

    thanks a lot, it 's fantastic !

  • @fredpim11
    @fredpim11 Год назад

    Glad to know that is the start of at least 20-hours course

  • @jesusrafaellopez4881
    @jesusrafaellopez4881 Год назад

    thank you so much, i admire you

  • @mikedickerson1978
    @mikedickerson1978 2 года назад +7

    Sir, 23 times 199 equals 4577, not 2047. 2047 divided by 23 equals 89.

  • @dmpase
    @dmpase 2 года назад +1

    Fun topic! Thanks!

  • @Zainab-tv8vt
    @Zainab-tv8vt 10 месяцев назад

    4:51 I don’t get this. What is Pn+1 was a number like 45, that’s not a prime

    • @Wutheheooooo
      @Wutheheooooo 4 месяца назад

      Basically when you + 1 to the product of all primes, that number divided by the prime in the list will always have a remainder of 1, so either it is a prime that is new, or a product of a prime that is new. So there will always be new prime.

  • @guillem2601
    @guillem2601 2 года назад +4

    Wouldn't be better to merge both number theory courses? They seem pretty similar. Or could you explain why are you making two separate lists of lectures? Thanks

  • @peterboneg
    @peterboneg 2 года назад +1

    Re(ρ)

    • @lassegrimmelt3336
      @lassegrimmelt3336 2 года назад +3

      They are equivalent by the functional equation of the zeta function.

    • @richerzd
      @richerzd 2 года назад +1

      He's also including the trivial zeroes (negative even integers).

    • @Arch009
      @Arch009 10 месяцев назад +1

      ah, well, he is including the trivial zeros!

  • @davidbrisbane7206
    @davidbrisbane7206 2 года назад +1

    There are two types of mathematicians. Those who can count and those who cannot.

  • @ronaldjorgensen6839
    @ronaldjorgensen6839 3 месяца назад

    NUMBERS ARE PSRT OF MEASITRMRN THEOTU?

  • @moustafaahmed6835
    @moustafaahmed6835 2 года назад

    hi can i watch is course

  • @YoussefMahmoud_1998
    @YoussefMahmoud_1998 4 месяца назад

    I like it when he says crack pots produce a proof of the Reimann hypothesis every month!🤣🤣🤣🤣

  • @pronaybiswas7524
    @pronaybiswas7524 2 года назад +4

    Thank you 😇 you're the best 💓

  • @williamtolliver749
    @williamtolliver749 2 года назад

    Zero and 1 are a unit? 1:30

    • @EllyCatfox
      @EllyCatfox Год назад +1

      What he meant was that 0 is just nothing, (or the absence of any units), and 1 is just the unit that were counting and making everything out of with numbers.
      You can think of the number 5 for instance as just being 1 1 1 1 1, like tallies as units.

    • @edcify8241
      @edcify8241 11 месяцев назад

      He didn't say that

    • @l.w.paradis2108
      @l.w.paradis2108 11 месяцев назад

      Zero is the identity for addition, one for multiplication. The natural numbers can be generated starting with the empty set.

  • @alamgirkhan330
    @alamgirkhan330 2 года назад

    Excuse me sir what books we use to study number theory

  • @alamgirkhan330
    @alamgirkhan330 2 года назад

    what books you use ????

    • @l.w.paradis2108
      @l.w.paradis2108 11 месяцев назад

      Niven et al. It's already off copyright, easy to download.

  • @leonardeuler6170
    @leonardeuler6170 2 года назад +6

    How different is this course from the one u did before ??

    • @autumnsthree8609
      @autumnsthree8609 2 года назад +1

      I think that this will contain more explicit information and include some graduate course content. The previous is mostly undergraduate.

    • @autumnsthree8609
      @autumnsthree8609 2 года назад +2

      Besides, Borcherds' videos always have new math when giving a lecture on an old topic.

    • @leonardeuler6170
      @leonardeuler6170 2 года назад

      @@autumnsthree8609 yeah thats true . I Just finished some lectures from that series so was confused which series to take. If this one has some graduate topics that would be better as i already have done an introductory course.

    • @maxvazquez9351
      @maxvazquez9351 2 года назад +1

      This is an undergrad course, not many prerequisites

  • @EllyCatfox
    @EllyCatfox Год назад

    Thank you!

  • @babukaruppasamy2892
    @babukaruppasamy2892 2 года назад

    I konow the new path of findings primenumbers....but I didn't study mathematics properly. What do I do?

    • @jimadams8385
      @jimadams8385 2 года назад

      Use nonassociative structures. Universals, please. Archimedes used infinitesimals rigorously. 'Zeroes of the Zeta function, which I will describe in a minute ...!' Please use Gougu and not Pythagoras! ((i)to(i))to(i) is contravariant. This modifies the Zeta function!

  • @elplatt
    @elplatt Год назад

    Oh hey, it's Sylvester's sequence!

  • @KoushikDas-vl6tq
    @KoushikDas-vl6tq 2 года назад

    Thank you

  • @Chainsawctopus
    @Chainsawctopus Год назад

    I don't mean to be a bother, but could you use another color than the orange marker? It's a bit hard to see. I feel terribly for complaining about such a trivial thing, because I very much appreciate you giving these lectures on RUclips for all of us who wish to learn! 🙏
    Anyway, thank you so much for posting these! It's really very kind of you!
    Oh, I was also giving a look at Hilbert's 11th problem. Actually, I should probably start with an easier problem (I'm still getting calibrated, it's been a decade since I was in school), do you have any suggestions?

  • @zrysapiens3660
    @zrysapiens3660 2 года назад

    errata at 08:38, 2047=23*89

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 2 года назад

    thanks

  • @Animax590
    @Animax590 2 месяца назад

    First lecture goes in Riemann hypothesis lol

  • @martian0x80
    @martian0x80 2 года назад

    Yess! I got the book

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks!!!!!!!!!!

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 2 года назад

    thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @kanchhediachamaar9289
    @kanchhediachamaar9289 2 года назад +1

    It is wrongly claimed that 2047 is 23 times 199. It is in fact 23 times 89. It is 4567 that is 23 times 199.

  • @johnnykhmer7780
    @johnnykhmer7780 2 года назад +2

    2 to the power of 11 minus 1 is not 2047; it's 4577, and 23x199 is not 2047 as well, but 4577.

    • @markelkins
      @markelkins 2 года назад

      You’re nearly correct. 2^11 - 1 = 2047 but 2047 = 23 x 89 and hence not prime.

    • @johnnykhmer7780
      @johnnykhmer7780 2 года назад

      @@markelkins no doubt. But why 23x199? I stopped for a moment thinking I must have miscalculated

  • @jorgetorres1670
    @jorgetorres1670 2 года назад

    Ok

  • @wyboo2019
    @wyboo2019 Год назад +1

    "there is actually no point in taking logs to base 10"
    american engineers are fuming rn

    • @ingiford175
      @ingiford175 10 месяцев назад

      He said in pure math. Engineering is not pure math, it is an application of math.

  • @toby2120
    @toby2120 2 года назад

    why is this importaint ?

  • @migarsormrapophis2755
    @migarsormrapophis2755 2 года назад

    yeeeeeeee

  • @kimsahl8555
    @kimsahl8555 2 года назад

    Number theory - a definition please, what is number fundamental properties.... I'll known the thoughts of God. The rest is details.

  • @markmanning2921
    @markmanning2921 2 года назад +1

    im sorry, you lost me at nothing + nothing = 1 lol

  • @xyzct
    @xyzct 2 года назад +2

    This series is similar to the first on number theory, but will include examples of applied number theory in nonlinear transgender bathroom power dynamics in a cis-normative post-colonial patriarchal paradigm. Should be exciting!

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 2 года назад

    thanks

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks!!!!!!!!!!

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks

  • @christophersedlak1147
    @christophersedlak1147 Год назад

    thanks