It's confusing and a bit annoying to title something "The Four Pieces:", then number them 0-4, which equals 5. There are 0 good reasons to do this. Humans use the "natural numbers" for good reason. I love 0. It does wonderful things for us. But starting to count with 0 isn't one of them unless you're dealing with memory arrays or some other situation where using zero is beneficial.
Okay, I hear you. But. And there’s always a but. 0 is an underlying assumption and axiom that we take. The rest are experimentally verified observables. Sometimes it’s worth knowing your zero point where your origin is. Your other steps away might be different with a different axiomatic beginning…
I loved the illustrations and simulation in this one! Really helped me to visualise and understand such immense scales! Thank you!
You're very welcome!
Thank you for the informative lecture on the formation of the universe! Keep the lectures coming! 😊
14:30 Why are there just 4 points, why isn't it a ring?
Another terrific lecture Dr. Kendall. Just joined your Patreon as supporting member. I wish more viewers supported your efforts.
Much appreciated! Thanks for your support!!!
It's confusing and a bit annoying to title something "The Four Pieces:", then number them 0-4, which equals 5. There are 0 good reasons to do this. Humans use the "natural numbers" for good reason. I love 0. It does wonderful things for us. But starting to count with 0 isn't one of them unless you're dealing with memory arrays or some other situation where using zero is beneficial.
Calm down bro. You can just add 1 to each number if that helps. Figured that one out all on my own ☺️
I am confused about why you are confused
I agree with you, but apparently no-one cares.
Okay, I hear you. But. And there’s always a but. 0 is an underlying assumption and axiom that we take. The rest are experimentally verified observables.
Sometimes it’s worth knowing your zero point where your origin is. Your other steps away might be different with a different axiomatic beginning…