@@juanelias1309 Depending on your background in mathematics, there are lots of books that might be suitable. I can recommend 'Journey through Genius' by Dunham and 'Mathematics and its History' by John Stillwell. If you already know undergraduate real analysis, abstract algebra, etc. then Jeremy Gray's books 'The Real and the Complex', 'A History of Abstract Algebra' and 'Worlds Out of Nothing' are all fantastic.
Generally we would be better off without TV. Recreational maths was a way to pass the time. Today, people squander billions of man hours per day watching BS TV. Imagine the new discoveries humankind would make putting all of that brain power to use on something worthwhile. It will never happen, as we now have RUclips to waste billions of hours/day of brain power, but it is a nice pipedream.
@@numbr6 your estimation of humans is a bit to big. Changes have happened a bit faster the last 200 years but the previous 198.000 or more have had intermitten periodes of progress with new tools. It's a combination of animal of wich the basic requirements are met will chill And need of and laziness are the biggest breeders of inventiveness And with vr that "wasted" brainpower can be translated better and more interactively than reality itself.
Leibniz seems to have created calculus as we know it. He created the notation and explained it in mathematical terms. Newtons calculus seems not as refined.
I very much doubt that this was 'an English thing'. This documentary was recorded in the 1980's. I don't know for a fact but I'm assuming the use of protective gloves was not common at that time.
+AlexanDr Moskalenko I'm growing to dislike some of the BBC culture presenters who show little or no sign of personal cultivation in their presentations. I just don't like the style of the history of anything important as presented by a "washerwoman". Maybe "The History of Mops" would be an exception.
I have to say, that this was a great video detailing the process of mathematical discovery and insight. I like seeing just how these things simply just start out from a simple mathematical curiosity and how somewhat seemingly obscure topics in geometry such as finding the tangents to curves with circles and finding areas would have such a profound impact to our society today. Really great documentary, it's rare to see such high quality documentaries these days.
To be fair, I imagine that these discoveries were motivated not merely by mathematical curiosity (though I'm sure that's part of it), but also by their applications in other fields of interest of Newton and Leibnitz. Newton was studying physics and astronomy, and I suspect that the heavy lifting he did in the development in calculus was largely motivated by a desire for reliable and logically rigorous mathematical models for understanding the motion of objects in space (often literally in space; ie. the planets). This also explains part of why his work so often pertained to motion, with a change in time as his independent variable. I don't know much about Leibnitz work, but based on this video I would guess that he was largely motivated by the pursuit of rigorous rules that he could use to build physical analogs for computations. One of the things that I think makes studying the history of mathematics so interesting is trying to understand what motivated the pursuit of this knowledge, and the development of these techniques. Often mathematical discoveries are drawn out by their necessity in some practical application, and I think that's an important avenue to explore in mathematical education. For me the mathematical curiosity was enough to hold my interest as a student, but for many of my peers that was not the case. For lessons to take hold, I think it may be better to begin not with teaching a method or formula, but instead begin with a question for which the development of that method is necessary, and let the pursuit of answering that question motivate the discovery of the method. Yes, this will often take longer, but it also encourages more personal engagement with the problem, and thus a deeper understanding of its solution.
@Evan Mosher some people claim that it is found that using any kind of latex or rubber gloves may harm the material more than human skin, though I don't know about that. It is also said that most historians these days prefer to use white cotton gloves, as it is more gentle on ancient artifacts, though with less friction. This is why when using cotton gloves, historians are more careful to grip the artifact carefully as to not slip
@@jorozco13yearsago40WHAT IS THE SUN has to exist in SPACE AND TIME. Think. (Consider what is outer “space” ON BALANCE.) Great. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !! Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !! Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE. This proves the fourth dimension, AND this solves the coronal heating “problem”. Great. Regarding WHAT IS E=MC2, c squared CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Great. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Great. What is gravity is, ON BALANCE, an INTERACTION that cannot be shielded or blocked. Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE, AS c squared CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. Notice what is the associated black “space” of WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE !!!! A given PLANET (including WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal area in equal TIME. ON BALANCE, I have CLEARLY proven and explained what is the fourth dimension. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution !!!!!! Magnificent. The curvature or shape of WHAT IS THE MOON DOES matches that of what is THE EARTH/ground. The maria DO occupy ONE THIRD of the near side of WHAT IS THE MOON. THE DENSITY OF water to lava IS ONE THIRD. NOTICE THE ORANGE SUN AND THE TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE SKY ON BALANCE !! I'M A GENIUS. I HAVE TRULY REVOLUTIONIZED PHYSICS. ONE HALF MULTIPLIED TIMES ONE THIRD IS ONE SIXTH !!!! ONE QUARTER TIMES TWO THIRDS IS ONE SIXTH. Great. ONE HALF MULTIPLIED TIMES ONE HALF IS ONE QUARTER. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the bulk density of WHAT IS THE SUN IS ONE QUARTER in what then constitutes DIRECT comparison WITH WHAT IS THE EARTH. Notice what is the fully illuminated AND setting/WHITE MOON ON BALANCE. It IS the SAME SIZE as WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE. MAGNIFICENT. THEREFORE, ON BALANCE, the LAND surface area of WHAT IS THE EARTH IS EXACTLY BETWEEN ONE THIRD AND ONE QUARTER. ABSOLUTELY MAGNIFICENT. ACCORDINGLY, ON BALANCE, the crust of WHAT IS THE MOON IS TWICE AS thick in what constitutes DIRECT comparison WITH that of what is the near side. (Think LAVA.) Consider what is the ORANGE SUN. Great. It IS the same size as WHAT IS THE EYE. NOTICE, ON BALANCE, what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky, AS WHAT IS THE EARTH IS ALSO BLUE. ABSOLUTELY MAGNIFICENT. Note: The bulk density of WHAT IS THE MOON IS comparable to that of what are (volcanic) basaltic LAVAs ON THE EARTH. The diameter of WHAT IS the Moon IS about ONE QUARTER of that of what is THE EARTH. I have surpassed Newton and Einstein. By Frank Martin DiMeglio
Amazing how they let him touch these books without gloves. He even fumbles them as if it were his own notebooks. How our appreciation for historic artifacts like this has evolved in 30 years is truly amazing.
Yeah I can't believe they let him thumb through those books without gloves on either... The oils on his skin can ruin the pages and ink in the books 👀😭
What a great presentation! it is always a point of clarification to see how the originator came to their discovery over how the discovery is presented in its completed form.
They didn't discover calculus- they developed it. 'While many of the ideas of calculus had been developed earlier in Egypt, Greece, China, India, Iraq, Persia, and Japan, the use of calculus began in Europe, during the 17th century, when Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz built on the work of earlier mathematicians to introduce its basic principles. The development of calculus was built on earlier concepts of instantaneous motion and area underneath curves.'
***** You are a fucking idiot. Even if the indians HAD done some work, Leibnitz and Newton transcended it to something that was basically wrong for most of its applications to something that we use in MODERN science. And the anti-jewish sentiment you have doesn't exactly speak for your sanity. Grow a brain.
+Merth667 I don't give a fuck about the Jews or the Indians with regard to this. This was a European discovery/development. All the Indians did was template driven and only of limited use since it had no theoretical underpinning. "Rothschilds" , per se, didn't exist in Newton's day, they were still named Bauer.
The part about Leibniz starts at 13:02. Superb docucumentary that shows original documents by Newton and Leibniz! And also a "calculating machine" build by Leibniz about 1675 !!
Hehehe - nice I was looking for someone who had tagged the time. I clicked because I wanted to learn more about Leibniz .... he is the real inventor in my book, seeing as it is his clever notation, not Newton's convoluted notation, that we use today.
@@RobertLock1978 Oh for the love of God. I know this comment is 3y old, but to give someone an honour of being the "real inventor" of something just because we use his/her notation for it is an absolute blasphemy. The notation is not what's important, the idea itself is.
Highly impressed by how both these guys come about their discoveries , they must have put a lot of thought over it over and over again , i wonder if such a new mathematical discovery is possible in today's world with we being taught more about their discoveries and hardly ever their philosophies and methods had been talked about.
A very interesting and accessible text for those interested in the development of the infinitesimal calculus is Newton's "The Method of Fluxions and Infinite Series". I'm currently making a video series about the text and have some videos on my channel about the text for those interested.
the invention of the differential notation by Leibniz was stellar. He understood calculus as a pure math in a way that was better than Newton. Newton was focused on doing things with parametrics but because of that, he limited himself and his notation wasn't as general that of Leibniz.
Very interesting Documentary! I wish they had taught The Calculus with the historical background as I think it makes the concepts more intuitive. Although I would like more on the motivations behind trying to prove all these theorems.
Leibniz had a "golden period," from 1672 to 1676, when he resided in Paris, met with the twenty-one years older Huygens, and twice made trips to London to confer with British scientists. In those years he discovered his form of the calculus.
G. W. Leibniz, As an undergraduate, the two volumes of the well-commented Latin edition of Descartes' Geometrie by Schooten seemed too much complicated to Leibniz. In the Disputatio arithmetica de complexionibus which Leibniz delivered as a new Magister artium in March 1666 at Leipzig university and which appeared still in the same year in print in a much enlarged version as the Dissertatio de arte combinatoria, he mentions, apart from Descartes' Geometrie, also Schooten's Principia matheseos universalis and in addition (because its algebraic notation differs from his own) Barrow's edition of Euclid.
@@g.w.leibniz6055 What is E=MC2 is consistent with TIME AND what is gravity. (TIME is thoroughly consistent with what is gravity ON/IN BALANCE.) WHAT IS E=MC2 is dimensionally consistent. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) !!! WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma. Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). CLEAR water comes from what is THE EYE. INDEED, consider what is (essentially and necessarily) BALANCED BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE !!! Lava IS orange, AND it is even blood red. The hottest flame is blue. The hottest lava is yellow. LOOK upwards, ON BALANCE, at what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky !! The orange (AND setting) Sun IS the SAME SIZE as what is THE EYE !! NOW, consider what is the fully illuminated (AND setting/WHITE) MOON ON BALANCE. (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.) WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites ON BALANCE, as the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE. c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. WHAT IS GRAVITY is, ON BALANCE, an INTERACTION that cannot be shielded or blocked (ON BALANCE) !!! E=MC2 is consistent with/AS WHAT IS GRAVITY, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. Magnificent. Notice that the curvature or shape of said Moon matches that of what is THE EARTH/ground (that is, given what is a CLEAR horizon, of course.) The diameter of WHAT IS THE MOON IS about ONE QUARTER that of WHAT IS THE EARTH/ground ON BALANCE. Excellent !!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE. Consistent WITH WHAT IS TIME, WHAT IS E=MC2 IS GRAVITY ON BALANCE. Finally, the average ocean tide is about 6 feet; AND said Sun manifests or forms at what is EYE LEVEL/BODY HEIGHT. The tidal range on the open ocean is about 3 feet. Notice, what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE ON BALANCE. Outstanding. Again, ON BALANCE, consider what is the fully illuminated (AND setting/WHITE) MOON ON BALANCE. The BULK DENSITY of WHAT IS THE MOON is comparable to that of (volcanic) basaltic lavas on THE EARTH/ground. The surface of WHAT IS THE MOON is chiefly composed of pumice. Excellent. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE), AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution; AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma. By Frank Martin DiMeglio
I took all 3 semesters of calculus plus differential equations and linear algebra and enjoy the courses. I'm a science major but this video is interesting of how they came up with the techniques I currently use today.
Excellent video. It would send document conservators reeling though seeing Newton's and Leibniz's original papers being handled in such a manner. I would imagine they would be nearly inaccessible nowadays and under strict handling protocols if they were.
I was on eggshells every time he touched them! (kidding, sorta.) Those documents have probably been scanned, photocopied, x-rayed, MRI'd, sanitized, treated with preservative, and placed in airtight neutral gas(or vacuum) fire and nuke-proof containers. One would hope.
GoldenTV3, and smearing all over Newton's faint pencil marks with his greasy fingers... Yeah. Anyone would do that, why not? But then, I just saw they even put on gloves to present a fucking plastic dish dryer tray for an auction. I still feel those gloves should belong here, but had accidentally been misplaced to that other video. (I do believe those were replicas, though. The books, not the plastic trays.)
I remember watching that on BBC2 when it was new. I had just started calculus at school. The OU stuff in the evening was of variable quality, but this was up there with the best.
The notion of the derivative is so simple that I'm surprised it wasn't discovered sooner. Perhaps it was just so sublime and elegant that it was elusive to even these great mathematicians?.
I'm wondering if that's down to the use of Arabic (really INDIAN) Numerals, and their active use of zero (other cultures used 'zero' but more as a placeholder than anything else), and the base 10 system, which makes mathematics far more streamlined than when compared to say, using Roman Numerals?
@@rsr789I think you're right. The Arabic numerals really simplified the symbolic of computations. Had we used roman numerals to study the universe, it would habe been not very practical. Roman numerals were fine with what the Romans used it for; bureaucracy and early engineering projects.
I believe the thinking is that very clean, freshly-washed-and-dried bare hands are better because your sense of touch is not impeded by the glove (plus no stray fibers getting caught and pulling on anything) and any tiny amount of oil produced by your skin in the time that you handle the document is actually beneficial in keeping it pliable. Obviously on a case by case basis though.
Not profound. He just takes for granted the billions of years of evolution that produced his mind. The world doesn't ask, it demands some level of understanding just to survive.
you don't see it do you.. hes making a deep point about how that the world is explainable and that there is order in the universe and that it's much more amazing than we could of ever conceived, that existence isn't basic but effortlessly sophisticated. Not the fact that our minds has learned to seeming instantly know certain details.
This is a very precious lecture. I would love to know more about the philosophical writings of Leibniz and Newton. I know mathematicians don't deal with philosophical ideas. It seems to them the payload is the methods of Calculus and the chaff of thought can be discarded.
One of my favourite presentations, and should be put side by side with Drs Unzicker and Disney revealing the Trancendental AM-FM Actuality of Logarithmic Time Conception.
From watching this it seems like Newton came up with the fact that a derivative is just the rate of change at a point of a function with the whole tangent line thing. Also the graph of the change of y and x is the derivative function. But Leibniz discovered the derivative at a point, the derivative function, the integral, and made the rules for taking the derivatives of different functions (product,quotient,compound,etc). So Leibniz contributed more to calc than Newton..?
The documentary presented the approaches of both man to solve fundamental problems of that time. But they continued developing their ideas even more. I think Leibniz was more "organized" and careful with notation since the beginning, and his ambition was to find universal logical procedures in mathematics; and Newton tried to apply his finding to motion and to explain physical problems (he kept developing calculus more than the video said). So the contribution of both men are definitely huge...
I guess it was just shocking because I had always perceived Newton to be the "father" of calculus as we know it today, or at least he is the person that was always mentioned in our calc 1 class. I am just curious to what actual distinguishable things did one do to make themselves more mentioned with calc. Because everything I think about when I think "calculus" was developed by Leibniz, which I previously thought was all Newton. And never the less I can see that both were integral* ( ha ha) in the foundation of calc.
From his school days, Leibniz can remember Arithmetic by Lans and Arithmetic by Clavius. As an undergraduate, he can remember the two volumes of the well-commented Latin edition of Descartes' Geometrie by Schooten.
+elninobritish there's a very good site called betterexplained.com. it explains a lot of math concepts intuitively so that you get the idea behind the equations and methods. i recommend you check it out!
If you want to fully succeed in any subject or topic, first understand the context. For example, consider the time at which Leibnitz was formalizing his ideas on Definite Integrals. It is the thought process based on previous works that Leibnitz and other mathematicians gain their knowledge to solve problems.
Eininobritish sorry for your plight. Now in 2020 we have Photomath apps . You just switch the keyboard over to diff functions of X and run your finger across the keys and you will produce so information it will come out at the speed of gibberish but COULD have been written by Einstein. Better than any lesson lol.
It's not only that you do not need white gloves when handling old documents or book. You should not wear them. The problem with the white glove myth is that it fights against the very thing it is supposed to ensure - the safety of the historical treasure. Would you find it easier to read a book wearing white cloth gloves? It removes any dexterity required when handling older paper. You are more likely to rip the document or bend it while wearing gloves of any sort. Moreover, white gloves are more likely to sop up sweat and other oils that can then be transferred to the document. And the small fibers can be left behind and filed away with the document.
Rubbish.. the oils on your finger tips WILL and Does stain the pages.. it doesn't matter what kind of paper it's written on.. oxygen and light can oxidize the ink on the pages as well.. this is all common sense 🤣
It's hardly intuitive that tangent problems and area problems are the inverse of each other. Is this basically an early statement of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus?
Robert, I had to pause the video and decided to read the comments in the meantime. I'm still learning fundamental calculus and have never heard that relationship. But as soon as you said it, it was clear and obvious. Instanously, I visualized multiple different premises of proofs in my mind and it was like an "It all makes sense" moment to me. So I'm not sure whether your "It's hardly intuitive" comment is accurate, but imagine that if someone told this to Euclid, we would have developed calculus 2000 years earlier. :)
According to the generalized uncertainty principle, the Planck length is in principle, within a factor of order unity, the shortest measurable length - and no improvements in measurement instruments could change that.
There are a number of texts including Yuktibhasa. You can search texts by madhava, nilekantha etc or just wiki "kerala mathematics" and "madhava series". This from an article from mathematician Bressoud "...had advanced to the point where they could apply ideas from both integral and differential calculus to derive the infinite series expansions of the sine, cosine, and arctangent functions"
Leibniz (1646-1716) became a diplomatic counselor in the service of the elector of Meyence. This allowed him to spend the years 1672-1676 in Paris, where he developed many of his mathematical ideas, including the calculus, under the personal influence of Huygens and by studying Descartes, Pascal, and British mathematicians.
Hindus first developed the numeral system on the Indian subcontinent around 500 BC. It was "copied" by the Iranians and Arabs around 600 AD. Medieval Christian Europeans studied numerals in Spain during the late 10th century, which was Muslim during the middle ages, the center of European learning at the time. However, it was Fibonacci who disseminated the numeral system throughout Europe with Liber Abaci (Book of Calculation), written in 1202. Fibonacci was the son of a merchant who traveled widely along the Mediterranean, learning the numeral system from Arab merchants. To say that it was taken by crusaders is ignorant and misleading. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu%E2%80%93Arabic_numeral_system
@@tomlouis6900 don't you understand that it's terribly important to pick sides. People measure their own greatness by the geographical and political conditions upon which they were implanted within or ejected from their mother's uteri. We must clearly demand recognition of our own greatness based purely upon the accomplishments of long dead individuals. Consider for a moment the utter mediocrity of "The average person". (see what I did there) The average person generally does not learn. By this, I've seen large amounts of theoretical pedagogical research suggesting that people prefer memorization and memorize best through repetition. This is why the vast majority of humanity, can't help their 8th grade or older children with their homework. When you're a person so obviously lacking greatness of any form, it is critically important to associate yourself as a supporter of other individuals. This can be done through religious affiliation, political parties, clubs, sports, or even sometimes, favorite dead mathematicians and scientists. I would like to believe I'm personally above the average in aptitude with regards to mathematics, the sciences and engineering. I would like to believe I... as you appear to be doing can move past trying to choose teams to support as though it was a sport. But it's entirely probable that what you and I might deem pragmatism, others might declare a disorder such as Asperger's. It is not important who is responsible for the math. We can celebrate the accomplishments of all those involved equally. It is clear that the work done by both Newton and Leibniz was exceptional. I believe it was certainly far beyond any level of reasoning I will ever achieve. I like to do proofs to entertain myself. I also like to theorize algorithms that can prove less computationally complex then pure mathematical forms of the same problem. I hope someday to be able to prove the mathematics represented by my algorithms in terms of computational complexity. But I believe I'm a fool compared to either Newton or Leibniz and am more than happy to profit from their research. And although my particular field of interest in mathematics has been primarily graph theory, I love calculus and am relearning it from scratch now. That said... I love Leibniz notation because it makes pretty much everything more readable.
As per recent studies, Madhava (14th century AD) from South India had worked on Calculus (Infinite series) before Newton & Leibniz www.cbc.ca/news/technology/calculus-created-in-india-250-years-before-newton-study-1.632433
![Gunna - whatsapp (wassam) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bY1kLt4iz94/mqdefault.jpg)
It's quite emotional to see the integral symbol written for the first time.
I actually had that same feeling when I saw the antiderivative symbol. Good comment.
@Roger C
I believe we are some kind of nerds ^^
Especially when he said that it had been unchanged to today, I realized how long that has been and it was quite emotional
Nerd 🤓. Just kidding. I agree, very touching.
911gp Yes...I was truly floored when I saw that! I thank god for the wonderful professors I had!!
I was fortunate enough to be lectured by the presenter, Jeremy Gray, in 2015. He has an encyclopedic knowledge of the history of mathematics.
That's awesome. I'm really when this original video aired
@@EJD339 I was at Warwick at the same time as Jeremy. His PhD supervisor was my wife's cousin, Ian Stewart.
Holy crap, I think remember watching this guy on the TV at like 2am doing OU lectures, after coming home from the pub when I was a student in the 80s.
Where can one self study the history of mathematics?
@@juanelias1309 Depending on your background in mathematics, there are lots of books that might be suitable. I can recommend 'Journey through Genius' by Dunham and 'Mathematics and its History' by John Stillwell. If you already know undergraduate real analysis, abstract algebra, etc. then Jeremy Gray's books 'The Real and the Complex', 'A History of Abstract Algebra' and 'Worlds Out of Nothing' are all fantastic.
We need more of this stuff on TV instead of shitty reality shows
BBC 4 has a number of programs like this on often.
Generally we would be better off without TV. Recreational maths was a way to pass the time. Today, people squander billions of man hours per day watching BS TV. Imagine the new discoveries humankind would make putting all of that brain power to use on something worthwhile. It will never happen, as we now have RUclips to waste billions of hours/day of brain power, but it is a nice pipedream.
No thanks. I reserve my time on TV for leisure. For the time being, I would love to see the area under the curves of Kim Kardashians..
Opium of the masses.
We can eat cake while they wallow in 'reality'😀
@@numbr6 your estimation of humans is a bit to big. Changes have happened a bit faster the last 200 years but the previous 198.000 or more have had intermitten periodes of progress with new tools.
It's a combination of animal of wich the basic requirements are met will chill
And need of and laziness are the biggest breeders of inventiveness
And with vr that "wasted" brainpower can be translated better and more interactively than reality itself.
The two dislikes are Barrow and Huygens, because they didn't think of it first.
I was a fan of Newton already, but this one time it's Leibnitz who stole my heart
Lol, Newton stole work
Leibniz seems to have created calculus as we know it. He created the notation and explained it in mathematical terms. Newtons calculus seems not as refined.
Im amazed by the way he touches those invaluable books with his bare hands.
Gareth Jefferson Yea, I was surprised they allowed him to touch with his bare hands Newton's notebook. Stupid Ass Fuck!
I very much doubt that this was 'an English thing'. This documentary was recorded in the 1980's. I don't know for a fact but I'm assuming the use of protective gloves was not common at that time.
Lol
Actually, you do less harm if you do not wear gloves. Your sense of touch can be muffled by gloves. Check with the British Library.
You are correct, check the royal societies videos on this..
old BBC edutainment was better than nowadays, less pretentious
+Allan Frankland So he can't have a preference?
+Allan Frankland Same reason I like them.
+AlexanDr Moskalenko I'm growing to dislike some of the BBC culture presenters who show little or no sign of personal cultivation in their presentations. I just don't like the style of the history of anything important as presented by a "washerwoman". Maybe "The History of Mops" would be an exception.
learning zone
As if that beard isn't pretentious. What they didn't have any razors back then or it was just 'cool' to be a slob?
Well done BBC. Wish I had seen this in 1986 while I was learning the subject. Both were among the greatest geniuses ever lived!
I have to say, that this was a great video detailing the process of mathematical discovery and insight. I like seeing just how these things simply just start out from a simple mathematical curiosity and how somewhat seemingly obscure topics in geometry such as finding the tangents to curves with circles and finding areas would have such a profound impact to our society today. Really great documentary, it's rare to see such high quality documentaries these days.
I've been on a RUclips binge trying to find something this good on the topic. I feel like a struck gold? 😅
To be fair, I imagine that these discoveries were motivated not merely by mathematical curiosity (though I'm sure that's part of it), but also by their applications in other fields of interest of Newton and Leibnitz.
Newton was studying physics and astronomy, and I suspect that the heavy lifting he did in the development in calculus was largely motivated by a desire for reliable and logically rigorous mathematical models for understanding the motion of objects in space (often literally in space; ie. the planets). This also explains part of why his work so often pertained to motion, with a change in time as his independent variable.
I don't know much about Leibnitz work, but based on this video I would guess that he was largely motivated by the pursuit of rigorous rules that he could use to build physical analogs for computations.
One of the things that I think makes studying the history of mathematics so interesting is trying to understand what motivated the pursuit of this knowledge, and the development of these techniques. Often mathematical discoveries are drawn out by their necessity in some practical application, and I think that's an important avenue to explore in mathematical education. For me the mathematical curiosity was enough to hold my interest as a student, but for many of my peers that was not the case. For lessons to take hold, I think it may be better to begin not with teaching a method or formula, but instead begin with a question for which the development of that method is necessary, and let the pursuit of answering that question motivate the discovery of the method. Yes, this will often take longer, but it also encourages more personal engagement with the problem, and thus a deeper understanding of its solution.
I love how he's just casually thumbing through Newton's notebooks.
I can't understand how he does this without gloves.
@Evan Mosher some people claim that it is found that using any kind of latex or rubber gloves may harm the material more than human skin, though I don't know about that. It is also said that most historians these days prefer to use white cotton gloves, as it is more gentle on ancient artifacts, though with less friction. This is why when using cotton gloves, historians are more careful to grip the artifact carefully as to not slip
What on earth is he doing to it at ruclips.net/video/ObPg3ki9GOI/видео.html ? I've treated Jeffrey Archer novels better than that...
@@jorozco13yearsago40WHAT IS THE SUN has to exist in SPACE AND TIME. Think. (Consider what is outer “space” ON BALANCE.) Great. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky !! Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE !! Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE. This proves the fourth dimension, AND this solves the coronal heating “problem”. Great.
Regarding WHAT IS E=MC2, c squared CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Great.
TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). Great.
What is gravity is, ON BALANCE, an INTERACTION that cannot be shielded or blocked. Consider what is THE EYE ON BALANCE. Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE, AS c squared CLEARLY (AND NECESSARILY) represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. Notice what is the associated black “space” of WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE !!!! A given PLANET (including WHAT IS THE EARTH) sweeps out equal area in equal TIME. ON BALANCE, I have CLEARLY proven and explained what is the fourth dimension. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution !!!!!! Magnificent.
The curvature or shape of WHAT IS THE MOON DOES matches that of what is THE EARTH/ground. The maria DO occupy ONE THIRD of the near side of WHAT IS THE MOON. THE DENSITY OF water to lava IS ONE THIRD. NOTICE THE ORANGE SUN AND THE TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE SKY ON BALANCE !! I'M A GENIUS. I HAVE TRULY REVOLUTIONIZED PHYSICS.
ONE HALF MULTIPLIED TIMES ONE THIRD IS ONE SIXTH !!!! ONE QUARTER TIMES TWO THIRDS IS ONE SIXTH. Great.
ONE HALF MULTIPLIED TIMES ONE HALF IS ONE QUARTER. Accordingly, ON BALANCE, the bulk density of WHAT IS THE SUN IS ONE QUARTER in what then constitutes DIRECT comparison WITH WHAT IS THE EARTH. Notice what is the fully illuminated AND setting/WHITE MOON ON BALANCE. It IS the SAME SIZE as WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE. MAGNIFICENT.
THEREFORE, ON BALANCE, the LAND surface area of WHAT IS THE EARTH IS EXACTLY BETWEEN ONE THIRD AND ONE QUARTER. ABSOLUTELY MAGNIFICENT.
ACCORDINGLY, ON BALANCE, the crust of WHAT IS THE MOON IS TWICE AS thick in what constitutes DIRECT comparison WITH that of what is the near side. (Think LAVA.) Consider what is the ORANGE SUN. Great. It IS the same size as WHAT IS THE EYE. NOTICE, ON BALANCE, what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky, AS WHAT IS THE EARTH IS ALSO BLUE. ABSOLUTELY MAGNIFICENT. Note: The bulk density of WHAT IS THE MOON IS comparable to that of what are (volcanic) basaltic LAVAs ON THE EARTH. The diameter of WHAT IS the Moon IS about ONE QUARTER of that of what is THE EARTH.
I have surpassed Newton and Einstein.
By Frank Martin DiMeglio
Amazing how they let him touch these books without gloves. He even fumbles them as if it were his own notebooks. How our appreciation for historic artifacts like this has evolved in 30 years is truly amazing.
Yeah I can't believe they let him thumb through those books without gloves on either... The oils on his skin can ruin the pages and ink in the books 👀😭
Yeah I cringed everytime he touched a page haha. I would pay thousands for a 1inx1in square from a page of that book.
And he could have been smoking too
Those aren’t originals, or else he wouldn’t be allowed the way he was turning pages.
ya, i hope they weren't the original books..
Thank you for making this video available. I learned a lot. ❤
What a great presentation! it is always a point of clarification to see how the originator came to their discovery over how the discovery is presented in its completed form.
They didn't discover calculus- they developed it. 'While many of the ideas of calculus had been developed earlier in Egypt, Greece, China, India, Iraq, Persia, and Japan, the use of calculus began in Europe, during the 17th century, when Isaac Newton and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz built on the work of earlier mathematicians to introduce its basic principles. The development of calculus was built on earlier concepts of instantaneous motion and area underneath curves.'
***** lol rothschild wasn't alive during isaac newton
***** You are a fucking idiot. Even if the indians HAD done some work, Leibnitz and Newton transcended it to something that was basically wrong for most of its applications to something that we use in MODERN science. And the anti-jewish sentiment you have doesn't exactly speak for your sanity.
Grow a brain.
+Merth667 I don't give a fuck about the Jews or the Indians with regard to this. This was a European discovery/development. All the Indians did was template driven and only of limited use since it had no theoretical underpinning. "Rothschilds" , per se, didn't exist in Newton's day, they were still named Bauer.
I feel your statement is trivialising the accomplishment of these great men.
@@rogeronslow1498 because men before them have already discovered it read Yuktibasha by Jyesthadeva and works of Madhava,Nilakantha,Aryabhatta etc
Thank you very much on that fine break down of the history of calculus!
This video is so great. Thank you for the upload.
Thank you. Thank you.
The part about Leibniz starts at 13:02. Superb docucumentary that shows original documents by Newton and Leibniz! And also a "calculating machine" build by Leibniz about 1675 !!
Hehehe - nice I was looking for someone who had tagged the time. I clicked because I wanted to learn more about Leibniz .... he is the real inventor in my book, seeing as it is his clever notation, not Newton's convoluted notation, that we use today.
@@RobertLock1978 Oh for the love of God. I know this comment is 3y old, but to give someone an honour of being the "real inventor" of something just because we use his/her notation for it is an absolute blasphemy. The notation is not what's important, the idea itself is.
@@DD-vc7fq Both of them had the idea.
@@MOTHblank ????
Very nice video. I studied this stuff in my history of mathematics course but you have added much more insight to this process. Thank you.
It's so nice to see the process. Well done Sir!
Thank you for uploading, that was very interesting!
All we students have to do is understand the concepts that these great men invented. Amazing thought.
"discover" is a better word imho since the calculus has been there in nature all along...
Wonderful documentary, fantastic narrator!
but please get the pubic hair out of his face. Disgusting ...
THANK YOU FOR CLEAR PERCEPTION WITH DESRIPTIVE WORDS
Good video Professor .THANK YOUUUU !!!!.
Highly impressed by how both these guys come about their discoveries , they must have put a lot of thought over it over and over again , i wonder if such a new mathematical discovery is possible in today's world with we being taught more about their discoveries and hardly ever their philosophies and methods had been talked about.
I think it's possible by the same way - "a lot of thought over it over and over again"
Noncommutative geometry - Alain Connes
This documentary brought tears of joy to my eyes.
It was amazing see the original ideas written by the hands of creators, what a Did to see by my self . Than you so much for these valuable work
Madhava of Sangamagrama has notable independent contributions towards birth of calculus atleast 2 century before the times of Newton & Leibniz
Thank you for this enlightening video! To witness how these two great men developed their ideas - awesome (and I don't use this word lightly).
A very interesting and accessible text for those interested in the development of the infinitesimal calculus is Newton's "The Method of Fluxions and Infinite Series". I'm currently making a video series about the text and have some videos on my channel about the text for those interested.
Great documentary. Need more of this.
Great to see Newton's note-books. Is amazing. Thank You for download.
the invention of the differential notation by Leibniz was stellar. He understood calculus as a pure math in a way that was better than Newton. Newton was focused on doing things with parametrics but because of that, he limited himself and his notation wasn't as general that of Leibniz.
sato Indeed. Leibniz notation all the way baby!
sato excellent comment!!!
lol Limited himself
The Powerman Bhaskara II preluded the basic concepts of differential calculus before Newton. Just no one ever heard about him.
Very interesting Documentary!
I wish they had taught The Calculus with the historical background as I think it makes the concepts more intuitive.
Although I would like more on the motivations behind trying to prove all these theorems.
Leibniz had a "golden period," from 1672 to 1676, when he resided in Paris, met with the twenty-one years older Huygens, and twice made trips to London to confer with British scientists. In those years he discovered his form of the calculus.
G. W. Leibniz,
As an undergraduate, the two volumes of the well-commented Latin edition of Descartes' Geometrie by Schooten seemed too much complicated to Leibniz.
In the Disputatio arithmetica de complexionibus which Leibniz delivered as a new Magister artium in March 1666 at Leipzig university and which appeared still in the same year in print in a much enlarged version as the Dissertatio de arte combinatoria, he mentions, apart from Descartes' Geometrie, also Schooten's Principia matheseos universalis and in addition (because its algebraic notation differs from his own) Barrow's edition of Euclid.
@@g.w.leibniz6055 What is E=MC2 is consistent with TIME AND what is gravity. (TIME is thoroughly consistent with what is gravity ON/IN BALANCE.) WHAT IS E=MC2 is dimensionally consistent. TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE) !!! WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma.
Consider what is the man (AND THE EYE ON BALANCE) who IS standing on what is THE EARTH/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE). CLEAR water comes from what is THE EYE. INDEED, consider what is (essentially and necessarily) BALANCED BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE !!! Lava IS orange, AND it is even blood red. The hottest flame is blue. The hottest lava is yellow. LOOK upwards, ON BALANCE, at what is the TRANSLUCENT AND BLUE sky !! The orange (AND setting) Sun IS the SAME SIZE as what is THE EYE !! NOW, consider what is the fully illuminated (AND setting/WHITE) MOON ON BALANCE. (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand.) WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution.
WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma. Gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites ON BALANCE, as the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. Consider TIME AND time dilation ON BALANCE. c squared CLEARLY represents a dimension of SPACE ON BALANCE. WHAT IS GRAVITY is, ON BALANCE, an INTERACTION that cannot be shielded or blocked (ON BALANCE) !!! E=MC2 is consistent with/AS WHAT IS GRAVITY, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. Magnificent. Notice that the curvature or shape of said Moon matches that of what is THE EARTH/ground (that is, given what is a CLEAR horizon, of course.) The diameter of WHAT IS THE MOON IS about ONE QUARTER that of WHAT IS THE EARTH/ground ON BALANCE. Excellent !!! It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE. Consistent WITH WHAT IS TIME, WHAT IS E=MC2 IS GRAVITY ON BALANCE. Finally, the average ocean tide is about 6 feet; AND said Sun manifests or forms at what is EYE LEVEL/BODY HEIGHT. The tidal range on the open ocean is about 3 feet. Notice, what is THE EARTH is ALSO BLUE ON BALANCE. Outstanding. Again, ON BALANCE, consider what is the fully illuminated (AND setting/WHITE) MOON ON BALANCE. The BULK DENSITY of WHAT IS THE MOON is comparable to that of (volcanic) basaltic lavas on THE EARTH/ground. The surface of WHAT IS THE MOON is chiefly composed of pumice. Excellent. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE), AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution; AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma.
By Frank Martin DiMeglio
Great video! Thanks for sharing!
Thank you for a very enlightening presentation.
I hope those books aren't originals the way he's creasing pages.
TheChosenOne I cringed with each page turn, as I thought the same thing.
TheChosenOne I was like who's this guy to touch Newton's pgs
+Allan Frankland then why does this copy look so used and old and torn apart? :S
How is he creasing them, they seen perfectly fine when he turns the pages???
I was the boom stand operator for this shoot. You should have seen what he did after he ran out of toilet paper.
Great to see the Newton's notes. Thanks!
Very interesting video showing the originals of Newton and Leibniz in a historical perspective. Many thanks!!!!!!
Thank you for the inspiring video! :)
I took all 3 semesters of calculus plus differential equations and linear algebra and enjoy the courses. I'm a science major but this video is interesting of how they came up with the techniques I currently use today.
my professor showed this to me twice when I was in calculus 1 and calculus 2....
Churros ..you are lucky
Sumamente Interesante muchas gracias por subir el contenido,es Maravilloso
Wonderful video --- thank you!
I love math especially solving differential equations.
+Younes Ali ن
Very funny
Wierdo
Excellent video. It would send document conservators reeling though seeing Newton's and Leibniz's original papers being handled in such a manner. I would imagine they would be nearly inaccessible nowadays and under strict handling protocols if they were.
I was on eggshells every time he touched them! (kidding, sorta.)
Those documents have probably been scanned, photocopied, x-rayed, MRI'd, sanitized, treated with preservative, and placed in airtight neutral gas(or vacuum) fire and nuke-proof containers. One would hope.
Very informative video! Thank you, sir!
thank you for your persistence
i am a librarian.i would have a heart attack and go rambo after him the way he is treating those books.
From 1676 to his death, Leibniz lived most of the time in Hanover as a librarian in the service of the kings of Hanover.
Why, they seem perfectly fucking fine to me when he turns the pages? Fucking christ stop getting so salty.
GoldenTV3, and smearing all over Newton's faint pencil marks with his greasy fingers... Yeah. Anyone would do that, why not? But then, I just saw they even put on gloves to present a fucking plastic dish dryer tray for an auction. I still feel those gloves should belong here, but had accidentally been misplaced to that other video.
(I do believe those were replicas, though. The books, not the plastic trays.)
I agree! I was terrified!!!
With gloves you lose your sense of touch making you liable to tearing the paper.
Great upload... god I hope these are replica books given the lack of care they are being handled.
I remember watching that on BBC2 when it was new. I had just started calculus at school. The OU stuff in the evening was of variable quality, but this was up there with the best.
I enjoyed this informative documentary very much.
The notion of the derivative is so simple that I'm surprised it wasn't discovered sooner.
Perhaps it was just so sublime and elegant that it was elusive to even these great mathematicians?.
I'm wondering if that's down to the use of Arabic (really INDIAN) Numerals, and their active use of zero (other cultures used 'zero' but more as a placeholder than anything else), and the base 10 system, which makes mathematics far more streamlined than when compared to say, using Roman Numerals?
@@rsr789I think you're right. The Arabic numerals really simplified the symbolic of computations. Had we used roman numerals to study the universe, it would habe been not very practical. Roman numerals were fine with what the Romans used it for; bureaucracy and early engineering projects.
very nice video, it made me understand it all. and i am very happy now
Wow, you sound really smart.
:)
thanks for sharing Gottfried Leibniz
Wow! That is just so interesting! Thanks so much!
It's weird we have to do so much work to understand the world that originally appeared to ask nothing of us.
I believe the thinking is that very clean, freshly-washed-and-dried bare hands are better because your sense of touch is not impeded by the glove (plus no stray fibers getting caught and pulling on anything) and any tiny amount of oil produced by your skin in the time that you handle the document is actually beneficial in keeping it pliable. Obviously on a case by case basis though.
very profound statement
Michael Harris , saving your words for future use...it's really quotable.
Not profound. He just takes for granted the billions of years of evolution that produced his mind. The world doesn't ask, it demands some level of understanding just to survive.
you don't see it do you.. hes making a deep point about how that the world is explainable and that there is order in the universe and that it's much more amazing than we could of ever conceived, that existence isn't basic but effortlessly sophisticated. Not the fact that our minds has learned to seeming instantly know certain details.
I have to admit that Jeremy Gray is a great mathematics teacher.
This is a classic. The book of the series was spotted in Univ bookshoppe 10 years ago.
Great video, thanks
19:15 is the perfect picture to explain all of Calculus.
Mike Lee could you explain me?
A true eureka moment :)
If you actually have a problem with his appearance, I don't think you'll ever be able to appreciate the pure, simple beauty of mathematics.
This is a very precious lecture. I would love to know more about the philosophical writings of Leibniz and Newton. I know mathematicians don't deal with philosophical ideas. It seems to them the payload is the methods of Calculus and the chaff of thought can be discarded.
One of my favourite presentations, and should be put side by side with Drs Unzicker and Disney revealing the Trancendental AM-FM Actuality of Logarithmic Time Conception.
Me actually watching this and being a math major makes me feel like a real math freak.
Me watching this and procrastining on my calculus studies makes me feel like a real dummo
I’m 13 years out of school but still watching this lol I never stopped loving math
love this guy's little faux hawk
Thinking back, I just realise that 1986 was the year I was introduced to calculus in high school (gymnasium). Seeing this would have helped me a lot.
Cool! Thank you for posting! I love learning about maths and researching Newton. Kinda funny for me cause I was a baby when this was produced
What about the Palimpsest of Archimedes ?
From watching this it seems like Newton came up with the fact that a derivative is just the rate of change at a point of a function with the whole tangent line thing. Also the graph of the change of y and x is the derivative function. But Leibniz discovered the derivative at a point, the derivative function, the integral, and made the rules for taking the derivatives of different functions (product,quotient,compound,etc). So Leibniz contributed more to calc than Newton..?
The documentary presented the approaches of both man to solve fundamental problems of that time. But they continued developing their ideas even more. I think Leibniz was more "organized" and careful with notation since the beginning, and his ambition was to find universal logical procedures in mathematics; and Newton tried to apply his finding to motion and to explain physical problems (he kept developing calculus more than the video said). So the contribution of both men are definitely huge...
I guess it was just shocking because I had always perceived Newton to be the "father" of calculus as we know it today, or at least he is the person that was always mentioned in our calc 1 class. I am just curious to what actual distinguishable things did one do to make themselves more mentioned with calc. Because everything I think about when I think "calculus" was developed by Leibniz, which I previously thought was all Newton. And never the less I can see that both were integral* ( ha ha) in the foundation of calc.
wellingt0nchurchILL yes, you are right! hahaha
hmm
From his school days, Leibniz can remember Arithmetic by Lans and Arithmetic by Clavius.
As an undergraduate, he can remember the two volumes of the well-commented Latin edition of Descartes' Geometrie by Schooten.
I’m a little shocked that he was leafing through the pages of this precious book without gloves.
Oh, look how he turn the pages and put the finger on the paper. I can't watch this.
I bloody wish I was good at Calculus lol, but this documentary has inspired me somewhat!
+elninobritish there's a very good site called betterexplained.com. it explains a lot of math concepts intuitively so that you get the idea behind the equations and methods. i recommend you check it out!
+Marco Martín Wow. Thank you. That website really helped a lot!
If you want to fully succeed in any subject or topic, first understand the context. For example, consider the time at which Leibnitz was formalizing his ideas on Definite Integrals. It is the thought process based on previous works that Leibnitz and other mathematicians gain their knowledge to solve problems.
+Marco Martín this site helped me allot.
Eininobritish sorry for your plight. Now in 2020 we have Photomath apps . You just switch the keyboard over to diff functions of X and run your finger across the keys and you will produce so information it will come out at the speed of gibberish but COULD have been written by Einstein. Better than any lesson lol.
Plain awesome and concise.
I love this video. So much class and the beard gives him the appearance of having infinite wisdom.
Ha. Now everyone has a beard again, especially stupid hipsters. Fashions just change.
Yeah, you got me. I'm a Leibniz man.
I am taking pre-calc next semester and I honestly can't wait to take calc. I get goosebumps thinking about this kind of stuff.
nerdy ass loser
Excelente, valioso, gracias!
Really liked this video.
It's not only that you do not need white gloves when handling old documents or book. You should not wear them. The problem with the white glove myth is that it fights against the very thing it is supposed to ensure - the safety of the historical treasure. Would you find it easier to read a book wearing white cloth gloves? It removes any dexterity required when handling older paper. You are more likely to rip the document or bend it while wearing gloves of any sort. Moreover, white gloves are more likely to sop up sweat and other oils that can then be transferred to the document. And the small fibers can be left behind and filed away with the document.
Rubbish.. the oils on your finger tips WILL and Does stain the pages.. it doesn't matter what kind of paper it's written on.. oxygen and light can oxidize the ink on the pages as well.. this is all common sense 🤣
Oh, I think Archimedes had discovered the fundamentals of Calculus by 212 BC,
long before Newton and a Leibnitz. Don't you think?
Wow this is so inspirational
history fo mathematics is so interesting. very good explaination in calm manner by Jeremy Gray.
Newton and Leibniz are two shining examples of Western Civilization.
Do remember that Newton's and Leibniz's work is only possible because of Arab's creation of numbers and zero
@@lits0_042 Also, don't forget that they lived off of British imperialism.
@@anagnorisis1522 Yea in the 1900's ding-o-ling
this video is pretty good
Hi,
Thank you for this video.
Where can I find more video like this one, and what was the title of this series of documentary?
Thank you ;-)
This is fantastically interesting.
Don't touch historical artefacts with your fingers. Even if it's for a BBC documentary.
It's hardly intuitive that tangent problems and area problems are the inverse of each other. Is this basically an early statement of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus?
Robert, I had to pause the video and decided to read the comments in the meantime. I'm still learning fundamental calculus and have never heard that relationship. But as soon as you said it, it was clear and obvious. Instanously, I visualized multiple different premises of proofs in my mind and it was like an "It all makes sense" moment to me. So I'm not sure whether your "It's hardly intuitive" comment is accurate, but imagine that if someone told this to Euclid, we would have developed calculus 2000 years earlier. :)
From Newton perspective, maybe. But from Leibniz's it's pretty obvious.
Truly Amazing
According to the generalized uncertainty principle, the Planck length is in principle, within a factor of order unity, the shortest measurable length - and no improvements in measurement instruments could change that.
If those are Newton's original notes, this man should be jailed.
very good old tv program
8:50 Daaamn, that was a nice visual.
There are a number of texts including Yuktibhasa. You can search texts by madhava, nilekantha etc or just wiki "kerala mathematics" and "madhava series".
This from an article from mathematician Bressoud "...had advanced to the point where they could apply ideas from both integral and differential calculus to derive the infinite series expansions of the sine, cosine, and arctangent functions"
Doing Calculus for years but still not perfect in it😕......I can't imagine the intleligence of these scientist....😨
^triggered indian^ Newton and Leibniz discovered Calculus
the arabs invented the tools but the europeans painted the mona lisa
Leibniz (1646-1716) became a diplomatic counselor in the service of the elector of Meyence. This allowed him to spend the years 1672-1676 in Paris, where he developed many of his mathematical ideas, including the calculus, under the personal influence of Huygens and by studying Descartes, Pascal, and British mathematicians.
Hindus first developed the numeral system on the Indian subcontinent around 500 BC. It was "copied" by the Iranians and Arabs around 600 AD. Medieval Christian Europeans studied numerals in Spain during the late 10th century, which was Muslim during the middle ages, the center of European learning at the time. However, it was Fibonacci who disseminated the numeral system throughout Europe with Liber Abaci (Book of Calculation), written in 1202. Fibonacci was the son of a merchant who traveled widely along the Mediterranean, learning the numeral system from Arab merchants. To say that it was taken by crusaders is ignorant and misleading. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu%E2%80%93Arabic_numeral_system
It really doesn't matter who discovered what, we're all one people on the same planet.
@@tomlouis6900 don't you understand that it's terribly important to pick sides. People measure their own greatness by the geographical and political conditions upon which they were implanted within or ejected from their mother's uteri. We must clearly demand recognition of our own greatness based purely upon the accomplishments of long dead individuals.
Consider for a moment the utter mediocrity of "The average person". (see what I did there)
The average person generally does not learn. By this, I've seen large amounts of theoretical pedagogical research suggesting that people prefer memorization and memorize best through repetition. This is why the vast majority of humanity, can't help their 8th grade or older children with their homework.
When you're a person so obviously lacking greatness of any form, it is critically important to associate yourself as a supporter of other individuals. This can be done through religious affiliation, political parties, clubs, sports, or even sometimes, favorite dead mathematicians and scientists.
I would like to believe I'm personally above the average in aptitude with regards to mathematics, the sciences and engineering. I would like to believe I... as you appear to be doing can move past trying to choose teams to support as though it was a sport. But it's entirely probable that what you and I might deem pragmatism, others might declare a disorder such as Asperger's.
It is not important who is responsible for the math. We can celebrate the accomplishments of all those involved equally. It is clear that the work done by both Newton and Leibniz was exceptional. I believe it was certainly far beyond any level of reasoning I will ever achieve. I like to do proofs to entertain myself. I also like to theorize algorithms that can prove less computationally complex then pure mathematical forms of the same problem. I hope someday to be able to prove the mathematics represented by my algorithms in terms of computational complexity. But I believe I'm a fool compared to either Newton or Leibniz and am more than happy to profit from their research. And although my particular field of interest in mathematics has been primarily graph theory, I love calculus and am relearning it from scratch now. That said... I love Leibniz notation because it makes pretty much everything more readable.
As per recent studies, Madhava (14th century AD) from South India had worked on Calculus (Infinite series) before Newton & Leibniz
www.cbc.ca/news/technology/calculus-created-in-india-250-years-before-newton-study-1.632433
what about zeno with 1/2 + 1/4 + etc...? not real calculus man
Europeans and Arabs plagiarising others' work shamelessly....
Deepak Maurya Is it plaigarism if you have never heard of the others' work though?
However, he was caught cheating in his exams.
ruclips.net/video/MvpuC7Dg4e0/видео.html
Thank you!
I have never seen the prior methods for finding tangent lines using circles. That was actually very interesting.