Hey guys, I wondered what would happen if this was shifted to another base, for example binary (hmm 100% on 1, how odd :D) and found an amazing thing when shifted to octal ... on 1000 iterations of 2^n 1,2 and 4 had equal (33.3333% odds) of being the first digit - not a single 3,5,6 or 7 I suppose this is the "why" you wanted us to ponder.... though what it means I'm not sure ... maybe counting with our thumbs was a bad idea?
...At this point it is increasing ten times faster than it was originally, but has exactly ten times as much ground to cover between 10 and 20 as it did between 1 and 2, so it will spend the same time there, then the same amount of time between 20 and 30 as between 2 and 3 etc.
That should give you a good idea of the scale invariance problem, which is what most seem to struggle with.
I advise using Wolfram|Alpha to graph e^(-x) from x = 0 to 5, then (separately) from 5 to 10. ..Look familiar? ;p
The logarithmic relationship should be true for every base, but the graphs would look different.
The relationship applies to numbers that are generated by most natural systems, and as Desrathedemon states, it's all about exponentiation.
Say a number is increasing a rate which is proportional to its own magnitude.
Starting at one, it will increase slowly, then increase double as fast at 2, then double as fast again at 4 etc until it reaches ten.... (read on in next comment)
It must have to do with the fact that population, finances, powers of two and Fibonacci numbers grow exponentially. If you look at population, it has a certain doubling time T. The time it takes the population to go from 1 * 10^n to 2 * 10^n will be T. But over a length of time T, the population will go from 2 * 10^n to 4 * 10^n. So the population will have spent the same amount of time having either a 2 or a 3 as a first digit than it did having 1 as a first digit.
I have a similar idea how to explain it for random things like population that counts on it that it's easier to reach over 9xxx then it is for 19xxx because that number is already atleast 2x bigger. and then you'd have to redo the entire 9xxx again before it becomes a 2
everytime you reach a new most significant digit (the 1 here) you have to go through all the numbers you just went through to reach a new most significant number. and since all of those sequences grow faster and faster the 1 stays in front longer then the following numbers
It is all a question of problability, how certain are you of getting the nunber when you start anything 1. 100%
Whem someone is making any nunber even there is always more tolerance if the number you are reaching for is starts with 1. Lets say the fire man makes an estimate there is 94 thousand people he will problably say there was 100 thousand.
It strikes me that the pattern is at least observable when taking limited sets of numbers: Between 1 and 9, there is 1 first digit which is one. However, between 1 and 20, there are 10 first digits which are one. Between 1 and 30, there are still only 10, and so on...
but the digit 1 gets in there first because we give it, literally, primacy in our numbering system. If our cutoff point for a number set is on average at the 50, or 500 or 5,000 level, the ones will already have made their mark and likewise, the 9's and 8's will appear stunted. It's just an unfair system.
It strikes me that the pattern is at least observable when taking limited sets of numbers: Between 1 and 9, there is 1 first digit which is one. However, between 1 and 20, there are 10 first digits which are one. Between 1 and 30, there are still only 10, and so on...
These represent growth phenomenon. At the extremes a leading 9 represents a very short dwell time in the order of magnitude (growth rate exp(x) no matter what x is will spend very little time in the 9##### range and quickly advance to the 1###### range). This is less technical way of stating below. I work with Zach Galifianakis' cousin and I agree Benford looks like Zach.
I know why Benford's Law works for powers of 'mixing it up'-numbers:
The number line is linear while f(x)=2^x grows faster and faster. This means that every time f(x) arrives at a new decimal (10, 100, 1000, etc.) it will grow slower from 10 to 20 and faster from 20 to 30. The line keeps getting steeper.
In other words, it stays in the 10..20 region longer than in the 20..30 region. This makes the chance of a 1 as a first number more likely.
I think it's because numbers themselves are just agreed constructs ie 1 equals 1 because we all agree it does. However, 1 is the first "opportunity" to be assigned a position, 2 is the next "opportunity" to be assigned a position, and once a counted item is assigned a position, it does not hold multiple positions. I wonder if this law holds true with quantum data.
I agree with Zander....all numbers are derivative of 1. It would work with any base, but it any case, 1 would be the most popular and would give the 1/x graph effect
I personally think this law makes perfect sense. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the reason that this happens in real world numbers and not randomly produced numbers, it hints to the fact that the numbers all start from one point and all the random factors kind of allow a certain amount of parts go forth from the standard deviation. I think looking at the first digit of populations is a great analogy. It's obviously more likely to have that smaller amount come up first. idk...
Duke Nukem reference? I think I'm in love -3. Oh and to the previous comment, the Vatican is, in fact, a Country. (Simply Google it, I usually post a link when I call bullshit on someone but you can't on YouTube).
You call that a beard? He's an amateur next to Anthony Trollope: Victorian novelist, champion of the mailbox and first-class beard-grower. Check out his photo on Wikipedia.
PS: Though I believe if you make a chart of "product prices" of all the shops in the world, you will find more 9s than, for example, 2s. That's just customer psychology as well. Shops like to make their prices smaller. And they do especially heart 9s.
town council: "in our village live 10k ppl, once we are over that figure we should try to increasing housing opportunities in the neighbor village so that all the villages in our area increase at a similar level"
I prefer the lectures of Sal alone, it seems like you are listening in into somebody else's conversation. Normally Sal's videos feel like he's talking to me but now it feels like he's not talking to me and this draws my attention away from the video. Maybe Vi can be good alone though and maybe I just need to get used to it.
If however they would represent different views or with some kind of other structure it might be better. Now its like having to jump to different thought lines all the time.
@Raikenbolai I believe Benford's law has been used to demonstrate that some financial data was made-up (although I don't know of any specific cases). When people make up numbers they tend to try to pick numbers starting with an even distribution of digits, so it can be spotted quite easily.
My first approach would be to see how this law acts differently in different bases. In binary, all nonzero numbers would obviously start with 1. I wonder if in base 3, things are skewed even more towards 1 than they are in decimal, slightly more skewed in octal, and less skewed in hexidecimal. in fact, I wonder if, for number systems in base x, if the distribution becomes more even as x approaches infinity.
My guess would be that it has something to do with Logarithms. Look at Log Paper and the amount of "space" taken up by numbers where Log (x) starts with a 1 is higher in proportion to those that start with 2, and so on. From memory, I'd say that the relative areas would roughly (or if my hunch is correct, exactly) match up with Benford's law.
The million dollar question then becomes *why* and that's a little harder to answer!
In a little different way this law also holds true for the second digit in numbers.
This law is so consistent that it can be used to help finding cases of tax fraud (at least I heard that). If someone fudges the numbers in a tax return they wont match this distribution anymore. Of course the one faking the numbers can check this, too. So if you don't wont to rise some eyebrows you're limited to certain numbers.
When a number is beginning at a 8 or 9 it is closely approaching a new 10^n place. Because of that the higher numbers will be jumped over to 1's and 2's
@cosmosgato I second this. Suppose a person starts counting. Once he is is at 10, he will have spent twice as much as time on the digit 1, than any other, only at 19 this will be even. Therefore the graph is skewed like this. However a single person could randomlybe measured at a number like 9,234 and it will be even until he is at 10,000, so it will most likely not be near benford's measurements until you got a large number of people counting.
pleaaaaase Sal don't bring anyone next time
tmn2727 2 days ago
the baddest thing that u did is
tmn2727 2 days ago
You were thinking of Luxembourg.
getsuga97 5 days ago
Sealand is the country with the smallest population.
ceenavanderaa 1 week ago
Montenegro is a country.
Gyroglle 1 week ago in playlist Sal and Vihart
Hey guys, I wondered what would happen if this was shifted to another base, for example binary (hmm 100% on 1, how odd :D) and found an amazing thing when shifted to octal ... on 1000 iterations of 2^n 1,2 and 4 had equal (33.3333% odds) of being the first digit - not a single 3,5,6 or 7 I suppose this is the "why" you wanted us to ponder.... though what it means I'm not sure ... maybe counting with our thumbs was a bad idea?
ceneezer 1 week ago
Comment removed
aceandalsostuff 2 weeks ago
...At this point it is increasing ten times faster than it was originally, but has exactly ten times as much ground to cover between 10 and 20 as it did between 1 and 2, so it will spend the same time there, then the same amount of time between 20 and 30 as between 2 and 3 etc.
That should give you a good idea of the scale invariance problem, which is what most seem to struggle with.
I advise using Wolfram|Alpha to graph e^(-x) from x = 0 to 5, then (separately) from 5 to 10. ..Look familiar? ;p
IHeartViHart 2 weeks ago
The logarithmic relationship should be true for every base, but the graphs would look different.
The relationship applies to numbers that are generated by most natural systems, and as Desrathedemon states, it's all about exponentiation.
Say a number is increasing a rate which is proportional to its own magnitude.
Starting at one, it will increase slowly, then increase double as fast at 2, then double as fast again at 4 etc until it reaches ten.... (read on in next comment)
IHeartViHart 2 weeks ago
Would this still work in a non base-10 numeral system?
MrAlienAssassin 1 month ago
It must have to do with the fact that population, finances, powers of two and Fibonacci numbers grow exponentially. If you look at population, it has a certain doubling time T. The time it takes the population to go from 1 * 10^n to 2 * 10^n will be T. But over a length of time T, the population will go from 2 * 10^n to 4 * 10^n. So the population will have spent the same amount of time having either a 2 or a 3 as a first digit than it did having 1 as a first digit.
Desrathedemon 1 month ago
I have a similar idea how to explain it for random things like population that counts on it that it's easier to reach over 9xxx then it is for 19xxx because that number is already atleast 2x bigger. and then you'd have to redo the entire 9xxx again before it becomes a 2
mentox 1 month ago
everytime you reach a new most significant digit (the 1 here) you have to go through all the numbers you just went through to reach a new most significant number. and since all of those sequences grow faster and faster the 1 stays in front longer then the following numbers
mentox 1 month ago
Sal, Montenegro is a independent country sinse like 2006 :) so you were not wrong.
Lazo00100001 1 month ago 2
It's incredible if you do it in the binary system: a physical constant ALWAYS begins with the digit 1!!! (Assuming there is no physical constant 0)
NNOTM 1 month ago
OH MY GOD SAL AND VIHART
My two most favorite educational video makers!!!!! AAAAA! *dies a happy geek death*
Crystal2193 1 month ago 4
6:54 challenge accepted.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
7089 4148 2942 2283 1865 1578 1363 1207 1076
andreirocks1992 1 month ago
It is all a question of problability, how certain are you of getting the nunber when you start anything 1. 100%
Whem someone is making any nunber even there is always more tolerance if the number you are reaching for is starts with 1. Lets say the fire man makes an estimate there is 94 thousand people he will problably say there was 100 thousand.
Assimsimchannel 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It strikes me that the pattern is at least observable when taking limited sets of numbers: Between 1 and 9, there is 1 first digit which is one. However, between 1 and 20, there are 10 first digits which are one. Between 1 and 30, there are still only 10, and so on...
richmondmaths 2 months ago
but the digit 1 gets in there first because we give it, literally, primacy in our numbering system. If our cutoff point for a number set is on average at the 50, or 500 or 5,000 level, the ones will already have made their mark and likewise, the 9's and 8's will appear stunted. It's just an unfair system.
richmondmaths 2 months ago
It strikes me that the pattern is at least observable when taking limited sets of numbers: Between 1 and 9, there is 1 first digit which is one. However, between 1 and 20, there are 10 first digits which are one. Between 1 and 30, there are still only 10, and so on...
richmondmaths 2 months ago
I've just died and gone to heaven. My two favourite math videographers in one video, in one place at one time, discussing one idea.
DeluxeWarPlaya 2 months ago
These represent growth phenomenon. At the extremes a leading 9 represents a very short dwell time in the order of magnitude (growth rate exp(x) no matter what x is will spend very little time in the 9##### range and quickly advance to the 1###### range). This is less technical way of stating below. I work with Zach Galifianakis' cousin and I agree Benford looks like Zach.
RogueIrish36 2 months ago
Comment removed
jooanchoi 2 months ago
I know why Benford's Law works for powers of 'mixing it up'-numbers:
The number line is linear while f(x)=2^x grows faster and faster. This means that every time f(x) arrives at a new decimal (10, 100, 1000, etc.) it will grow slower from 10 to 20 and faster from 20 to 30. The line keeps getting steeper.
In other words, it stays in the 10..20 region longer than in the 20..30 region. This makes the chance of a 1 as a first number more likely.
also: Newcomb looks a bit like Zach Galifianakis.
sjwimmel 2 months ago
Comment removed
sjwimmel 2 months ago
Vi Hart and Sal Khan are both wrestler-sounding names.
stegeo3 3 months ago
Comment removed
thequantumduckling 4 months ago
khan you should use cam studio to record and edit your videos because you can zoom in :D. you could have zoomed in on the graph :D
VanMedia 4 months ago
I think it's because numbers themselves are just agreed constructs ie 1 equals 1 because we all agree it does. However, 1 is the first "opportunity" to be assigned a position, 2 is the next "opportunity" to be assigned a position, and once a counted item is assigned a position, it does not hold multiple positions. I wonder if this law holds true with quantum data.
sef3gen 4 months ago
I agree with Zander....all numbers are derivative of 1. It would work with any base, but it any case, 1 would be the most popular and would give the 1/x graph effect
MrJohnnyd1982 4 months ago
Would this still work if we were in a different base?
rotflmaopmpqxyz 4 months ago
It's so weird to hear Vi's voice when it's not at 1000 words per minute
UltimateRandomN3ss 5 months ago 37
Mr Salman Khan, please add Vi Hart into your full time faculty at Khan Academy.
filmmetoo 5 months ago
Oh my gosh. Two of the most awesome people on the internet are referencing another awesome math teacher(singing banana). My life is nearly complete.
I have yet to ride a unicorn.
Buggy793 5 months ago
I personally think this law makes perfect sense. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the reason that this happens in real world numbers and not randomly produced numbers, it hints to the fact that the numbers all start from one point and all the random factors kind of allow a certain amount of parts go forth from the standard deviation. I think looking at the first digit of populations is a great analogy. It's obviously more likely to have that smaller amount come up first. idk...
Zander101084 5 months ago
Duke Nukem reference? I think I'm in love -3. Oh and to the previous comment, the Vatican is, in fact, a Country. (Simply Google it, I usually post a link when I call bullshit on someone but you can't on YouTube).
supmywaxter 5 months ago
You call that a beard? He's an amateur next to Anthony Trollope: Victorian novelist, champion of the mailbox and first-class beard-grower. Check out his photo on Wikipedia.
edwardmeade 5 months ago
Do videos with PatrickJMT!
radiator0505 5 months ago
Montenegro is a country. But you were thinking of Monaco. And yes, the Vatican is the smallest (internationally recognized) sovereign state.
SimaanFreeloader 5 months ago
nvm if it works with prime numbers cant be the human mind, lol
mowmoh 5 months ago
PS: Though I believe if you make a chart of "product prices" of all the shops in the world, you will find more 9s than, for example, 2s. That's just customer psychology as well. Shops like to make their prices smaller. And they do especially heart 9s.
mowmoh 5 months ago
Sales Rep: "Oh man, I just have to get some more sales, once I'm over 10k sales this month, I'll get a bonus."
mowmoh 5 months ago
town council: "in our village live 10k ppl, once we are over that figure we should try to increasing housing opportunities in the neighbor village so that all the villages in our area increase at a similar level"
just a thought.
greetings from germany :)
mowmoh 5 months ago
Comment removed
mowmoh 5 months ago
She always sounds so stoned...
valdas0 6 months ago
Godwin's law is even more mysterious
danix30001 6 months ago
Populations do start with 1..... whenever you're counting things you always start with 1.
Jackson882 6 months ago
Comment removed
Raysyedrocks 6 months ago
The vatican is not a country. But Luxembourg is.
Coerciveutopian 6 months ago
Dr. Khan, montenegro is a country.
Ibahz 6 months ago 2
Populations, Universal constants, and the math phenom mentioned have a logarithmic distribution.
drfoxcourt 6 months ago
As you approach a higher digit, the variablility increases?
SzlampStudios 6 months ago
I prefer the lectures of Sal alone, it seems like you are listening in into somebody else's conversation. Normally Sal's videos feel like he's talking to me but now it feels like he's not talking to me and this draws my attention away from the video. Maybe Vi can be good alone though and maybe I just need to get used to it.
If however they would represent different views or with some kind of other structure it might be better. Now its like having to jump to different thought lines all the time.
DennisWagenaar 6 months ago 3
Comment removed
sasamuraki 6 months ago
You guys have mathematical conversations? Aweome. :)
jamesallen74 6 months ago
These "conversations" are pretty neato, but how do they fit in with an actual curriculum?
FreemanFighter94 6 months ago
@FreemanFighter94 Do they need to fit into curriculum?
ohd34484 6 months ago
Actually, Montenegro is a country.
Axelisten 6 months ago 3
@Axelisten He was talking about Monaco. Good video BTW.
KingPtolemyIII 6 months ago
You know what would be awesome? Dr. Drew Pinsky and Sal talking about biology.
TheAustinConlon 6 months ago
Guys, Sal is married and has a son lol.
rinwhr 6 months ago 24
@rinwhr He has a daughter too! :) I'm glad he has time for us !
Skywire1337 6 months ago
Wow thats pretty amazing.
griftorifto2 6 months ago
ooooh, sal has your wife seen this?
ro33han 6 months ago
Montenegro is a country. It has been a country since 2006, I believe.
killie232 6 months ago
Marry please.
Tweetling 6 months ago
I wonder if this can be used to detect corrupted statistics. Or would statistics typically be corrupted in accordance with Benfords law?
Raikenbolai 6 months ago
@Raikenbolai I believe Benford's law has been used to demonstrate that some financial data was made-up (although I don't know of any specific cases). When people make up numbers they tend to try to pick numbers starting with an even distribution of digits, so it can be spotted quite easily.
PeterCollingridge 6 months ago
@PeterCollingridge Groovy. Sounds like a useful tool to remember. At least as a simple flag indicate further investigation is required.
Raikenbolai 6 months ago
VI-SAL....this just keeps getting better
nafaylodhi 6 months ago
I can't express how much I love the combination of Vi and Sal
saenmb 6 months ago
snakesnakesnakesnakesnake
TheGluall 6 months ago 5
montenegro is a country!!
artukmi 6 months ago
i wonder if his office stil his closet cuz then the first minute be quite funny
cinereyes 6 months ago
That's Duke Nukem's ancestor...
MoGaDeX 6 months ago
My first approach would be to see how this law acts differently in different bases. In binary, all nonzero numbers would obviously start with 1. I wonder if in base 3, things are skewed even more towards 1 than they are in decimal, slightly more skewed in octal, and less skewed in hexidecimal. in fact, I wonder if, for number systems in base x, if the distribution becomes more even as x approaches infinity.
PaperSpock 6 months ago
VI HART <3
tchanabc 6 months ago
YAY!!! Vi Hart!!!
jamesjosephclarke 6 months ago 29
@jamesjosephclarke whos vi hart?
hahs4 6 months ago
@hahs4 Just take a search for Vi Hart on youtube, you'll find some of her awesome maths vids in the first results.
jamesjosephclarke 6 months ago
My guess would be that it has something to do with Logarithms. Look at Log Paper and the amount of "space" taken up by numbers where Log (x) starts with a 1 is higher in proportion to those that start with 2, and so on. From memory, I'd say that the relative areas would roughly (or if my hunch is correct, exactly) match up with Benford's law.
The million dollar question then becomes *why* and that's a little harder to answer!
petedeutscher 6 months ago
I think the result can be inferred from modular arithmetic, but I was never too good at modular arithmetic so I will pass out on this one.
PCGamerPortal 6 months ago
See singingbanana's explanation on the same topic.
thecubegeek 6 months ago
@jsiooa Right, it's a country but I believe he was thinking of Monaco.
werdnativ 6 months ago
vi hart!
arsenalfooty4 6 months ago
I checked Benford's Law with the sizes of files on my computer (yay Linux terminal). It matched with Benford's Law nearly exactly.
OniLinkPlus 6 months ago
In a little different way this law also holds true for the second digit in numbers.
This law is so consistent that it can be used to help finding cases of tax fraud (at least I heard that). If someone fudges the numbers in a tax return they wont match this distribution anymore. Of course the one faking the numbers can check this, too. So if you don't wont to rise some eyebrows you're limited to certain numbers.
superdau 6 months ago
This is the video from sal that i can't watch.
TheMoses8870 6 months ago
Sal, since this works for the power of any number, does it also work for any randomly selected set of numbers?
AlderDragon 6 months ago
When a number is beginning at a 8 or 9 it is closely approaching a new 10^n place. Because of that the higher numbers will be jumped over to 1's and 2's
PoketoMtg 6 months ago
oh my god
vi hart united with sal khan talk about your educational fandoms crossing
lilshortypie72 6 months ago
Because you count up.
You are more likely to stay at 1, or 100, then move to 2 (200).
You more likely to stay 2 than move to 3
...
cosmosgato 6 months ago
@cosmosgato except human populations grow madly and without control
PCGamerPortal 6 months ago
@cosmosgato I second this. Suppose a person starts counting. Once he is is at 10, he will have spent twice as much as time on the digit 1, than any other, only at 19 this will be even. Therefore the graph is skewed like this. However a single person could randomlybe measured at a number like 9,234 and it will be even until he is at 10,000, so it will most likely not be near benford's measurements until you got a large number of people counting.
Dundrio4 6 months ago
@Dundrio4 Sorry, at 90 this will be even.
Dundrio4 6 months ago
Ahhh, I love real world mathematics!
Yakushii 6 months ago
i felt like this was very hard to listen to.
moguai352 6 months ago
This is amazing. I love everything about this.
Paulorific 6 months ago
whoooo!
CougarJargon 6 months ago
Kahn and Vi, sittin in a tree...
Zlibservacratican 6 months ago 35
@Zlibservacratican Isn't Khan already married?
xXMathMagicianXx 6 months ago
@xXMathMagicianXx Its a joke.
Zlibservacratican 6 months ago
Awesome! I love Vi's vids!
Zlibservacratican 6 months ago