this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
516 points (97.1% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35715 readers
1830 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

What concepts or facts do you know from math that is mind blowing, awesome, or simply fascinating?

Here are some I would like to share:

  • Gödel's incompleteness theorems: There are some problems in math so difficult that it can never be solved no matter how much time you put into it.
  • Halting problem: It is impossible to write a program that can figure out whether or not any input program loops forever or finishes running. (Undecidablity)

The Busy Beaver function

Now this is the mind blowing one. What is the largest non-infinite number you know? Graham's Number? TREE(3)? TREE(TREE(3))? This one will beat it easily.

  • The Busy Beaver function produces the fastest growing number that is theoretically possible. These numbers are so large we don't even know if you can compute the function to get the value even with an infinitely powerful PC.
  • In fact, just the mere act of being able to compute the value would mean solving the hardest problems in mathematics.
  • Σ(1) = 1
  • Σ(4) = 13
  • Σ(6) > 10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10 (10s are stacked on each other)
  • Σ(17) > Graham's Number
  • Σ(27) If you can compute this function the Goldbach conjecture is false.
  • Σ(744) If you can compute this function the Riemann hypothesis is false.

Sources:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mookulator@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago (7 children)

The four-color theorem is pretty cool.

You can take any map of anything and color it in using only four colors so that no adjacent “countries” are the same color. Often it can be done with three!

Maybe not the most mind blowing but it’s neat.

[–] cll7793@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Thanks for the comment! It is cool also pretty aesthetically pleasing!

[–] Blyfh@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

What about a hypothetical country that is shaped like a donut, and the hole is filled with four small countries? One of the countries must have the color of one of its neighbors, no?

[–] Afrazzle@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think the four small countries inside would each only have 2 neighbours. So you could take 2 that are diagonal and make them the same colour.

[–] SgtAStrawberry@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Looks to be that way one of the examples given on the wiki page. It is still however an interesting theory, if four countries touching at a corner, are the diagonal countries neighbouring each other or not. It honestly feels like a question that will start a war somewhere at sometime, probably already has.

[–] Vegasimov@reddthat.com 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In graph theory there are vertices and edges, two shapes are adjacent if and only if they share an edge, vertices are not relevant to adjacency. As long as all countries subscribe to graph theory we should be safe

[–] SgtAStrawberry@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

The only problem with that it that it requires all countries to agree to something, and that seems to become harder and harder nowadays.

[–] ikilledlaurapalmer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Ok now do this one. What color is the donut country?

[–] Afrazzle@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Someone beat me to it, so I thought I'd also include the adjacency graph for the countries, it can be easier to see the solution to colouring them.

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There are some rules about the kind of map this applies to. One of them is "no countries inside other countries."

[–] atimholt@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not true, see @BitSound's comment.

It does have to be topologically planar (may not be the technical term), though. No donut worlds.

[–] kogasa@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

The regions need to be contiguous and intersect at a nontrivial boundary curve. This type of map can be identified uniquely with a planar graph by placing a vertex inside each region and drawing an edge from one point to another in each adjacent region through the bounding curve.

[–] Blyfh@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[–] sanguinepar@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I read an interesting book about that once, will need to see if I can find the name of it.

EDIT - well, that was easier than expected!

[–] L3s@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Read the author as Robin Williams

[–] Artisian@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Note you'll need the regions to be connected (or allow yourself to color things differently if they are the same 'country' but disconnected). I forget if this causes problems for any world map.

[–] rycee@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

I suspect that the Belgium-Netherlands border defies any mathematical description.

[–] dandroid@dandroid.app 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you had a 3 dimensional map, would you need more colors to achieve the same results?

Edit: it was explained in your link. It looks like for surfaces in 3D space, this can't be generalized.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

this whole thread is the shit.

[–] clumsyninza@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Isn't the proof of this theorem like millions of pages long or something (proof done by a computer ) ? I mean how can you even be sure that it is correct ? There might be some error somewhere.