this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
625 points (97.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

34342 readers
1829 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
625
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by cll7793 to c/nostupidquestions
 

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 88 points 11 months 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 40 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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

[–] Reliant1087 1 points 11 months ago

Your map made me think how interesting US would be if there were 4 major political parties. Maybe no one will win the presidential election 🤔

[–] Blyfh 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 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?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 11 months ago (3 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 7 points 11 months 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.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 11 months 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 4 points 11 months 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 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months 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.

[–] Blyfh 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

But each small country has three neighbors! Two small ones, and always the big donut country. I attached a picture to my previous comment to make it more clear.

[–] Pronell 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

In your example the blue country could be yellow and that leaves the other yellow to be blue. Now no identical colors touch.

[–] wazoobonkerbrain 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You still have two red countries touching each other, what are you talking about?

[–] Pronell 1 points 11 months ago

Oops I meant the red one goes blue.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Whoops I should've been clearer I meant two neighbours within the donut. So the inside ones could be 2 or 3 colours and then the donut is one of the other 2 or the 1 remaining colour.

[–] Blyfh 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

You're right. Bad example from my side. But imagine this scenario:

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That map is actually still quite similar to the earlier example where all 4 donut hole countries are the same. Once again on the right is the adjacency graph for the countries where I've also used a dashed line to show the only difference in adjacency.

[–] Blyfh 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Oh wow, now I feel dumb. Thanks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Feeling dumb is just the first step in learning something new

[–] neumast 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Make purple yellow and one of the reds purple.

[–] SuddenDownpour 1 points 11 months ago

...There is no purple though?

[–] BitSound 10 points 11 months ago

In that image, you could color yellow into purple since it's not touching purple. Then, you could color the red inner piece to yellow, and have no red in the inner pieces.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months 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 2 points 11 months 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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months 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 1 points 11 months ago
[–] sanguinepar 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months 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 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Read the author as Robin Williams

[–] Artisian 8 points 11 months 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 14 points 11 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months 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 2 points 11 months ago

this whole thread is the shit.

[–] clumsyninza 1 points 11 months 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.