More about Pebbling a Chessboard - Numberphile 

What do you expect Zvezdelina Stankova is a legend!!!!!

and allow your results to be used by any other branch of science or engineering for eternity.

If you love/enjoy your job, that's always the truth.

I liked that!

Woot

I wish I could see a video of this !

i also wrote a simple program to play around with it. i can do moves my self by clicking on the clones in my one.

​@@Drachenbauernobody asked

"Infinitely many times!"

just admit it you dont know why but you find her attractive

beejblud Please take this feedback in the spirit intended: I genuinely only want you to be viewed as the person you really are, and I think your comment doesn't reflect that. Perhaps you should stop for a moment and contemplate the larger environment where you are commenting. Lots and lots of people talk about how our culture values women for their looks over (or, just as bad, in addition to) any and all of their other attributes. You don't have to agree with this perspective to acknowledge that many other people have it. So when you make a comment like this, so short and context free, I think you'll find that many people will assume you are referring to her physical (or visual) attractiveness rather than any relevant attribute to a number focused RU-vid channel. It's your choice to care about that interpretation. But that choice will say a lot about who you are as a person. I don't know you, and I can't judge you. But this comment, in this context, is part of a larger problem of not recognizing the value women bring to the human world. Perhaps you didn't intend the comment to be taken as insulting and demeaning. (You just wanted to have a little bit of rudeness? You thought it was actually complimentary? Intention is so hard to determine online, which is why I don't judge it.) But your voice is part of a cacophony on RU-vid in general, which detracts from the conversation, in my opinion. You thought it was appropriate to randomly comment on Prof. Stankova's attractiveness. I think it is appropriate to give some feedback on that, for future reference. Best Wishes!

i see your point but its just a savy observation

Antonio Craveiro Unless you are really slow writer... no. That should have taken at most 5 minutes of his time, 2-3 if he is a decent touch-typer.

Antonio Craveiro Not sure why you think this needs that much mental preparation. If you can type it in 3 minutes, you can think & type it in three minutes. It's not Ulysses, but a fairly straightforward argument.

I work in the vfx industry and my job is fun too... People can get really jealous if they see you dont consider your job annoying or exhausting... but its their fault.. they were just lazy and didnt work for their dream job... or they never had one... But brady.. you are a youtuber.. honestly, no one becomes a youtuber if hes not having fun at it :)

They do need to eventually produce something of value if they intend to continue having someone pay them to "just have fun." Writing it all down and saying how it's useful in the real world is a bit less fun than playing number games all day.

Stefan Ehrenhaus I'm a Software Developer, and love it. Which is fortunate. This job would be SO BORING if I didn't love it to pieces.

Fucken weirdos

He asks those types of questions to get reactions. As you can see it was a good one.

electroguy02 I had the same idea.

Absolutely right. You need to fill the whole of Greenland, but you can only ever have two clones on the bottom edge (and the left edge) so you can’t do it even with an infinite number of moves.

i respect her, but I kinda can't stand it

I was thinking the same thing. I love her accent. :)

if you like russia, it is not ... unless it is perhaps lithuania ...

Nope. I love it too. :D

It's Bulgarian

Probably because he doesn't want people to unsubscribe because he's spamming them with stuff they don't want to see. If you like the subject, you can follow the links to see more of it (like I did), if you don't you don't have to do a thing.

Because it is published, at a later date. Like, today. :P

It's a math problem similar to the one discussed, but with humans making choices. Of those who got #1, how many watch others, and how many others? Of those who got #2 (me), how many go back to #1, and so on. #1 should get the most views, a portion of those who got it plus smaller portions of the other groups, and each one farther along should get fewer views, with those who got #4 needing to go to all the others first, while other groups follow the chain as long as they like.

Greyed Makes sense. Thanks.

For dwarves, it's not mathematics if the result isn't burning elves.

+villanelo1987 But Kicking, for goodness! (sorry had to)

+villanelo1987 cats in Dwarf Fortress are just like these clones

Human Effigy - Just like engineering is simply applied physics, physics is applied math. Since the three disciplines are so intimate, do the one that's most fun for you.

"Release the clowns >:DD"

Pentagons don't tessellate. ;p

DataCab1e well actually a hyperbolic plane would allow 3 pentagons around each point.

Mike Toth No, a hyperbolic plane would allow 4 pentagons around each point. 3 pentagons around each point would be a spherical geometry, which is finite.

similar to a dodecahedron? Thank you for your corecton

Yes. "Spherical geometry" here refers to anything that is non-Euclidean and non-hyperbolic; one with positive curvature.

You are trying to represent something which should be double within quarter.

The missing is eight fold.

@Marcus Jones can't you differentiate between reality and a joke?

I don´t see it...

It's subtle but I can see the circle kinda move/change size very slightly.

​@@k0r0z1fmaybe you're high?

Yezzir. Hypothetically.in practice you would at some point be unable to program anything to perform actions at a rate sufficient enough to actual perform the task, since the number of actions would be doubling at double the rate every time they double.

And thus you have provided an argument that actually proves the impossibility of the problem, unlike that which was presented in the video. Restricting the "game" to a finite amount of moves is, after all, a completely ridiculous limitation. But, since you have proven that even with an infinite amount of moves you can't fill up enough of Green Land to get every clone out of the 6-cell prison, you have proven it is impossible to empty the entire prison while not imposing arbitrary, silly restrictions like finiteness. So, you have proven to be better at Maths than Numberphile! Well done!!

Guess you have to watch them all over again and look for end screen notes! ;-)

That particular starting prison is solvable, but in general it is not sufficient that there be enough space in greenland. There is also the question of how efficiently you can fill it.

+Angel Slavchev depend on prison size etc. if you only have 1 1/2 piece in the original prison to start the game can end in 1 move with both half pieces in the prison it can equate to the single 1 piece in the original prison etc.

My question *exactly* ! Now if one could prove that, say, the more moves you make, the further the pebbles on the bottom row and left-most column would have to move -- although I don't think this is the case and thus not a factor -- or if you could prove that other rows and columns can't even be completely filled either.... then that would be a convincing proof that escaping from the prison is impossible. The way it's presented, however, relies on the unfounded claim that _"Oh, it's a finite game and thus we have a contradiction!"_ ; which, with it being an unfounded claim and all, makes the argument as presented in the video fall apart at the seams.

No, math actually works perfectly in both examples...