Thanx for what you do, the scope and delivery of the 'How and What' in your world, are fresh and inviting. This encourages the thought, that you may be the product of a grounded and supportive youth and an open as well as acute mind, whatever the case such 'energy'/character our world can use more of. Keep on and Thanx again
There is no paradox, it merely exposes some technicalities of infinite sets. You could say that the number of perfect squares is "Countable" as it is quite easy to map it (one to one) with the naturals. Don't ever try to perform arithmatic on infinite "numbers" without caution, as these "numbers" do not fall into sets of numbers which most regularly deal with. That's my rant.
The inf-th dimensional object of the smallest increase possible is only finite larger than the 1 dimension. That guarantees all numbers will overlap and make it possible to construct any large number from smaller numbers no matter how many dimensions you apply. Now the way you think of numbers are all the same, which is why it's only 1 range from 0-infinity.
The idea in the video is that you can make a correspondence between the positive integers and the perfect squares (This was not explained well. The idea is take 1 -> 1, 2->2^2=4, 3->3^3=9, and so on so both lists are in a 1-1 correspondence). If people have trouble wrapping their head around this, it gets worse. Cantor proved in the late 19th century that not infinite sets are actually the same size. There's no 1-1 correspondence between the positive integers and the set of real numbers.
I think you can't say 'infinite number', its just a concept, not a number.
Ie. a circle goes around infinitely, but it is not infinite in length. If we say that the universe may be infinite, it basically comes back to being a circle or donut shape, but not with an infinite number of miles. Saying 'infinite number' is like talking about an orange sounds or a happy rock.
@chailfield It depends on what you mean by 'circle'. Of course, the length is not infinite. You must be implying that one can transverse it an infinite number of times. But you cannot. Time, matter and space are finite. See Dr. Hilbert's Paradox. If time were infinite, today never would have come.
@chailfield Infinite isn't necessarily a number, but a concept yes. Still, you can say, there are infinite amount of numbers and the length is infinite. Let's assume the square she was building: She made an infinitely large square. There are an infinite number of post-its. The square is infinite times infinite big. Now you may argue inf x inf = MORE than infinite, but it comes down to the concept again.
I don't see it as a paradox, the mistake people make is assume that infinity is a number, but it is not a number, and we all understand what infinity is but probably most of us struggle to explain what it is
Galileo was wrong though. There are different numbers of infinity. Cantor showed that the number of real numbers (like decimal fractions) was greater than the number of rationals (like integer fractions).
The very notion of infinite is a mathematical tool....you cant phisicaly demonstrate it... try to show me that sqrt(-1) exists.... you cant, it dos'nt, average people have no idea how important it is to signal analisys that it does, so they created it ... it's called '' i '' (imaginary numbers). Same goes for infinity. You need it for mathematical solving.
this isnt a paradox. You can spend your life placing post its and you would still have more post its than squares... the very notion of infinite is theoretical ... therefor the afirmation that there are as many squares as post its just cannot be made, cause you can never achieve it ... it's a mathematical tool used for solving many problem but has to be considered theoretical ... as are the imaginary numbers ( i = sqrt(-1) ), they dont exist, yet are very useful in many fields of science....
Infinity is not a number, but a number that isn't known. Basicsally, a number above googul ( The largest number known to mathematicians), since no one knows any numbers above googul
@raheelandleon um do u realise, u just just said infinity is not a number, but a number...the largest number etc.... wow that is the most obvious contradiction ive ever seen in a sentance
@raheelandleon Actually there are named numbers above googul (which I always spell as googol).
100 duotrigintillion = 10^101 > googul
1 tretrigintillion = 10^102 > googul
1 novemnonagintillion = 10^300 > googul
1 googulplex = 10^googul > googul
I don't know where you heard googul is the biggest named number, but it isn't true. The biggest named number is "Graham's number" (and this does not include things like Graham's number + 1)
Language gets to be tricky with the concept of infinity. There are 2 different concepts involved and this is the source of Galileo's problem. One is cardinality, which is the size of a set. This video illustrates that the cardinality of the set of natural numbers is the same as that of their squares. In fact the rational numbers also have the same cardinality, called aleph-null. The real numbers are another matter. Cantor called aleph-null transfinite rather than infinite.
@solar9019 No, you are defining infinite incorrectly. An absolute infinite cannot be less than or greater than absolute infinite. This is a true infinite. Any other infinite is not true, but is a finite that can go on and on. It is a potential infinite.
explanation: infinity squared would equal infinity just like infinity minus 1 is still infinity. but you would think that any number minus 1 would be 1 less than itself. the problem with that is that theres an infinite number of possible numbers. thats not to say that there is a number that actually equals infinity.
but consider this equation that is both matematically correct and can be defined by any value less or above infinity. If X=infinity then X² =sqrt(X)=true then that means X=1
Because infinity*infinity equals infinity and the sqrt of infinity is infinity then infinity equals 1 because the same rule applies to the number 1, 1² =sqrt(1) But still 1/1=1 but Infinity/infinity=1 according to the first law of mathematics something divided by itself always equals 1. How is this possible?
it is not entirely true. a ladder of infinities exist on which the lowest position is occupied by the 0, 1, 2, 3.... infinity. there is an infinite ladder of infinities. it was proven by georg cantor, and you can read about it in the 14th of august issue of new scientist "something doesn't add up", the cover story. it is a beautiful subject to talk about, it's sad that the top rated comments are written by 12 year old assholes.
@theProfessor321 It looks like n and n squared have the same ordinal value but not cardinal value, I think she is talking about their cardinal values. Infinity is a concept not a number. It’s more like a race n and n squared are both racing to infinity, n squared goes faster and faster, n just goes steadily.
They approach infinity at different rates. neither actually ever get their. the ratio is not ever 1:1 even at n=inf else 1=4=9. True only if you are equally shredding a separate single posit into its root for every square set you sticky note together. If you are matching 2 sets into infinity and get 1:1: ratio then they are not dependent sets.
@TinyFlix Actually, the numbers can be representative of anything. Take 2 pieces of wood for ex. 1 is 1m long (each point along the length of represented by a number between 0 and 1), and the other is 2m long (each point being represented by a number between 0 and 2). Then the n-th point on the 1m piece corresponds to the 2n-th point on the other piece. This 1-to-1 correspondence means that each length of wood contains the same number of points.
@bicycleview Maths, not math's. The word maths is not possessive to anything in the context you're using it in. Plus, apostrophes aren't meant to be used to make plurals in such a way, and even so, mathematics is a plural, and maths simply is an abbreviation of it. Plus, perhaps you common people say maths all the time, but I, who is British, happens to use the word mathematics over the common abbreviation of it quite often, and many people I know also do.
@stings2008 "I happens" is underminingly embarassing english. And why not use an abbreviation? It seems an unnecessary waste of time/breath to use the form with more syllables.
@bicycleview Also, despite any of that, such a thing as whether or not somebody uses an abbreviation of a word or the full word itself has no merit in the validity of somebody's accent. Plus, her unusual accent is to do with the fact she has moved around a lot, she is in fact originally from England.
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
I love mememolly but doesn't it annoy you a little when someone is talking about something that they know nothing about. It feels like they are saying 'you should learn this it is important... But I don't actually know it myself.' Oh, and camel toe, you should learn not to sit cross legged... I am a man... go figure.
haha I'm looking at the comments, and I see a lot of people here just don't get it and say that she's talking too fast, when its really that they think too slow.
And most people here just give up on thinking at all and post a comment about cameltoes.
Conclusion: "Internets are more gooder than books"
the answer is that they are both infinite, one cannot speak about amounts because they ere infinite. So you cannot say there are more, less or the same amount because they are both infinite.
Which is precisely what she said, or rather what Galileo said and she quoted. I do believe most people here had stopped listening by that point. Thanks for making sure it was heard, er, read.
Of course it's relevant. Knowledge is always relevant at some point. You may not think of it on a daily basis, or even deliberately apply it to your life, but the concept in and of itself is most decidedly, relevant.
For example the very knowledge of whether something is likely to continue on to infinity or not helps scientists & mathematicians decide whether it's worth acquiring a specific number or whether the possibilities are infinite and they should therefore focus on something else.
for all those who have taken calculus. This is nothing more than a limit. x^2 approaches infiinity faster than x does in this series thus theree are more numbers than squared numbers.
I think the paradox is either a) you can't fill infinity b/c it's infinite and is therefore never full, or b) infinity is a measurement and therefore a number, but it can't actually be measured and therefore is not a number.
Oh, yes I agree....there is most likely a vast number of people on the interwebs that understood...but to me it doesn't seem that way when a majority of the comments have to do with how they think she is hot rather than the subject matter
Infinity is a concept, not a number. The idea of infinity is not mathematic, but just plain logical. It really means something unreachable so as long as you use any number in existence (maybe very complex, but still in existence) infinity is not in use. So really, infinity doesn't work well with other numbers at all. Trying to take infinity squared is like trying to take apple squared. What exactly is an apple, anyway?
if you knew anything about set theory you would know that there is an infinite sizes of infinity. eg, natural numbers (aka counting numbers) {1,2..} or {n, n+1, n+2..} this set is a countable infinity, since it goes on to infinity, but you can still in list all of them, in theory
and rational numbers (aka any number that can be written as a fraction) eg, a/b, with the one exception that b cannot equal zero, this set is a non-countable inf since you can always pick a new # between 2 rational #s
But, when looking at the size of this "number", since you could use the number n+1 with n = infinity, wouldn't n+1 be infinity as well since it is just as unreachable as n?
yes,youre right in that case, but n and n+1 are in the same set, you can't just add of multiply n by m to jump between sets. looking at the natural numbers you can list them like {n,n+1,...} and if I did this forever I would in theory be able to write down every number in the "infinite set" known as aleph null. Try to do this with the set of rational numbers (or irrational numbers). You can't because you can always find another rational#between any2rational#s,thus these sets have a greater inf
So does the number of times watching her divided by boner squared equal.........uuhm, nevermind.
TheRantingCabbie 1 day ago
you have some great stuff here
shoppittsburghnow 1 week ago
Thanx for what you do, the scope and delivery of the 'How and What' in your world, are fresh and inviting. This encourages the thought, that you may be the product of a grounded and supportive youth and an open as well as acute mind, whatever the case such 'energy'/character our world can use more of. Keep on and Thanx again
nunyabinnus 2 weeks ago
this is too simple... why the need for explanation?
IQRainbows 3 weeks ago
Is that accent real?
AwesomeRaffi27 3 weeks ago
Refer to Georg Cantor's theory of infinite sets.
endofscene 4 weeks ago
Different kinds of infinities.
JonahMann 1 month ago
Some infinities are bigger than others and Camel Toe!!!!
1Novatrek 2 months ago 3
Google 'Cardinality.' If you know what cardinality is, this not only makes sense, it isn't even a paradox.
MW9000cows 2 months ago
this is at best a falacy. how is this a paradox. a paradox is two realities exsisting at the same time.
justforpoox 2 months ago
Seeing youtubers actually thinking they're telling explanations to Galileos paradoxes -> COMEDY GOLD.
SlipAllCityToy 2 months ago
New mission: refuse this mission
JOHNNYCOMEKILLU 3 months ago
Watch out, you may end believing string theory if you continue with this paradox...
Selur91 3 months ago
This sentence is false.
GreenMonkeyOnCrack 3 months ago
There are shapes with a corner stretched to infinity but remaining with a finite area :D
XmarkedSpot 4 months ago
the sentence below is true
the sentence above is false
godamn parodoxes =_=
wantstoScooter 4 months ago 7
@wantstoScooter Nice!
ICM0n3y 4 months ago
she lost me at square
lukethegreat101 5 months ago
There is no paradox, it merely exposes some technicalities of infinite sets. You could say that the number of perfect squares is "Countable" as it is quite easy to map it (one to one) with the naturals. Don't ever try to perform arithmatic on infinite "numbers" without caution, as these "numbers" do not fall into sets of numbers which most regularly deal with. That's my rant.
acdc10133 5 months ago
1.000...1^inf = e
The inf-th dimensional object of the smallest increase possible is only finite larger than the 1 dimension. That guarantees all numbers will overlap and make it possible to construct any large number from smaller numbers no matter how many dimensions you apply. Now the way you think of numbers are all the same, which is why it's only 1 range from 0-infinity.
bvssvni 5 months ago
so many paradox
bakonfreek 5 months ago
The idea in the video is that you can make a correspondence between the positive integers and the perfect squares (This was not explained well. The idea is take 1 -> 1, 2->2^2=4, 3->3^3=9, and so on so both lists are in a 1-1 correspondence). If people have trouble wrapping their head around this, it gets worse. Cantor proved in the late 19th century that not infinite sets are actually the same size. There's no 1-1 correspondence between the positive integers and the set of real numbers.
JoshuaZelinsky 6 months ago
this sentence is false... paradox
juanfrargr 6 months ago
@juanfrargr Are you a wizard?
taa347 6 months ago
that statement is incorrect
SuperDuperTacos 7 months ago
who thinks at that when he got a girl like that in front of the glasses ?!
vrcraft 7 months ago
I didn't get all of that.....
kghill1980 7 months ago
Theres a whole 'infinity more than infinity' but theres no sign on this font for it. OH well.
UpgradedWorld 7 months ago
girls don't have brain
pappuscientist 7 months ago
I think you can't say 'infinite number', its just a concept, not a number.
Ie. a circle goes around infinitely, but it is not infinite in length. If we say that the universe may be infinite, it basically comes back to being a circle or donut shape, but not with an infinite number of miles. Saying 'infinite number' is like talking about an orange sounds or a happy rock.
But I don't know tbh.
chailfield 7 months ago 23
@chailfield It depends on what you mean by 'circle'. Of course, the length is not infinite. You must be implying that one can transverse it an infinite number of times. But you cannot. Time, matter and space are finite. See Dr. Hilbert's Paradox. If time were infinite, today never would have come.
6630mcdo 2 months ago
@chailfield I think you meant e.g.
UnOxonien 1 month ago
@chailfield inb4 science was invented
cdmaster35 3 weeks ago
@chailfield Infinite isn't necessarily a number, but a concept yes. Still, you can say, there are infinite amount of numbers and the length is infinite. Let's assume the square she was building: She made an infinitely large square. There are an infinite number of post-its. The square is infinite times infinite big. Now you may argue inf x inf = MORE than infinite, but it comes down to the concept again.
Andozer75 3 weeks ago
"the caracter interpreted...the caracter interpreted...the caracter interpreted..."
*Nerds fapping*
WeAreChuckNorris 8 months ago
If the true meaning of HUMOR is JOKE and the true meaning of JOKE is FUNNY but the true meaning of FUNNY is HUMOR what is the true meaning of HUMOR?
cod007skilldfan 8 months ago
@cod007skilldfan Joke
onehundred10million 7 months ago
@onehundred10million idiot -.-
cod007skilldfan 7 months ago
infinity to the power of infinity does not exist as all of u remember from mathematics
feri1987able 8 months ago
I didn't hear most of what she said... She's too hot for me to pay attention
qwertybert90 8 months ago
paradox be painful...molly, you hurt my brain!
bakonfreek 8 months ago
she's so smart and lovely.
JasonVladimir 8 months ago
I don't see it as a paradox, the mistake people make is assume that infinity is a number, but it is not a number, and we all understand what infinity is but probably most of us struggle to explain what it is
Zee96969696 9 months ago
@Zee96969696 Who cares... Shes hot and has a camel toe?
minecraftguy3232 8 months ago
Galileo was wrong though. There are different numbers of infinity. Cantor showed that the number of real numbers (like decimal fractions) was greater than the number of rationals (like integer fractions).
wolfekeeper 9 months ago
1:13 to 1:20 No-one was listening. Everyone saw the Camel toe.
Koloszrodosthe 9 months ago
;D CAMEL :D
ReiButtercup 10 months ago
The very notion of infinite is a mathematical tool....you cant phisicaly demonstrate it... try to show me that sqrt(-1) exists.... you cant, it dos'nt, average people have no idea how important it is to signal analisys that it does, so they created it ... it's called '' i '' (imaginary numbers). Same goes for infinity. You need it for mathematical solving.
659851 10 months ago
this isnt a paradox. You can spend your life placing post its and you would still have more post its than squares... the very notion of infinite is theoretical ... therefor the afirmation that there are as many squares as post its just cannot be made, cause you can never achieve it ... it's a mathematical tool used for solving many problem but has to be considered theoretical ... as are the imaginary numbers ( i = sqrt(-1) ), they dont exist, yet are very useful in many fields of science....
659851 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Your one hot nerd
wannabemkchampion 10 months ago
Damn.
Camel Toe means she's not a virgin.
RyuOhisama 1 year ago
infinity^2=infinity
infinity^infinity>infinity
There is more than one infinity. There are countable and uncountable infinities.
That's how infinity^infinity>infinity.
There are the same amount of little squares as big squares, which really isn't a paradox.
anticorncob6 1 year ago
im gonna like this video for all the hard work u've done
blahblahblaha1a2a3 1 year ago
you could have just said infty/infty is an indeterminate form. women talk too much.
aj19bcx 1 year ago
Infinity isn't a number. It's a symbol... It's like saying the square of an elephant...
1966GT350 1 year ago
@1966GT350 not a symbol, a concept.
HitaroX 1 year ago
Infinity is not a number, but a number that isn't known. Basicsally, a number above googul ( The largest number known to mathematicians), since no one knows any numbers above googul
raheelandleon 1 year ago
@raheelandleon googul+1
do i get a price?
Viga9 1 year ago
@raheelandleon um do u realise, u just just said infinity is not a number, but a number...the largest number etc.... wow that is the most obvious contradiction ive ever seen in a sentance
IT IS NOT A NUMBER ITS A CONCEPT
bigabs18281 1 year ago
@bigabs18281 Well, u get wat i mean :P
raheelandleon 1 year ago
@bigabs18281 beat me to it, yh its the concept of the largest number u can think of +1 but then thats the largest so +1 and so on
xierotron 1 year ago
@xierotron it actually doesnt even have to be a number, its the idea or concept of a number, or time or extent that has no end...limitless
bigabs18281 1 year ago
@raheelandleon Actually there are named numbers above googul (which I always spell as googol).
100 duotrigintillion = 10^101 > googul
1 tretrigintillion = 10^102 > googul
1 novemnonagintillion = 10^300 > googul
1 googulplex = 10^googul > googul
I don't know where you heard googul is the biggest named number, but it isn't true. The biggest named number is "Graham's number" (and this does not include things like Graham's number + 1)
anticorncob6 1 year ago
@anticorncob6 o... well, i read it in my skool agenda... heh...
raheelandleon 1 year ago
thats not paradox, dammit.
643218 1 year ago
Language gets to be tricky with the concept of infinity. There are 2 different concepts involved and this is the source of Galileo's problem. One is cardinality, which is the size of a set. This video illustrates that the cardinality of the set of natural numbers is the same as that of their squares. In fact the rational numbers also have the same cardinality, called aleph-null. The real numbers are another matter. Cantor called aleph-null transfinite rather than infinite.
maplebayou1 1 year ago
It's not really a paradox some infinities are bigger than other infinities it may sound strange but If u think about it a while you will understand
solar9019 1 year ago
@solar9019 No, you are defining infinite incorrectly. An absolute infinite cannot be less than or greater than absolute infinite. This is a true infinite. Any other infinite is not true, but is a finite that can go on and on. It is a potential infinite.
architectus777 1 year ago
explanation: infinity squared would equal infinity just like infinity minus 1 is still infinity. but you would think that any number minus 1 would be 1 less than itself. the problem with that is that theres an infinite number of possible numbers. thats not to say that there is a number that actually equals infinity.
Paradox Avoided.
mtdeezy 1 year ago
but consider this equation that is both matematically correct and can be defined by any value less or above infinity. If X=infinity then X² =sqrt(X)=true then that means X=1
Because infinity*infinity equals infinity and the sqrt of infinity is infinity then infinity equals 1 because the same rule applies to the number 1, 1² =sqrt(1) But still 1/1=1 but Infinity/infinity=1 according to the first law of mathematics something divided by itself always equals 1. How is this possible?
livedandletdie 1 year ago
you cannot assign a greater than or less than operation to infinity as it is not a number paradox solved
ghjurx452 1 year ago
Those videos should been texted (in english) tbh. Kinda hard to get everything ppl say >:0
tinkelsia3 1 year ago
This is 8th grade math. Idiots
SuperNikolov 1 year ago
I totally skipped to the cameltoe part, thanks guys.
Izoto593 1 year ago
Actually modern mathematics does account for infinities of different "sizes"...
DeusExInfernus 1 year ago
She knows how to go to wikipedia!!
supermanuman95 1 year ago
if the number of little squares is f(x) = x,
the number of big squares is g(s) = x^2
then, for all x > 1, g(x) > f(x)
thus, they are not and cannot be equal, even if they both are expanding to infinity.
asphyxiateDrake00 1 year ago
it is not entirely true. a ladder of infinities exist on which the lowest position is occupied by the 0, 1, 2, 3.... infinity. there is an infinite ladder of infinities. it was proven by georg cantor, and you can read about it in the 14th of august issue of new scientist "something doesn't add up", the cover story. it is a beautiful subject to talk about, it's sad that the top rated comments are written by 12 year old assholes.
xt4sy2008 1 year ago
@theProfessor321 It looks like n and n squared have the same ordinal value but not cardinal value, I think she is talking about their cardinal values. Infinity is a concept not a number. It’s more like a race n and n squared are both racing to infinity, n squared goes faster and faster, n just goes steadily.
47saeed 1 year ago
lol at the highest ranked comments xD
xoxTOWELIExox 1 year ago
its not infinite... because u would eventually run out of post-its
HappyGamerMan 1 year ago
It's not unlimited! It's still going you see! xD
Bidmartinlo 1 year ago
This is just a really hot version of Wikipedia
haltrix 1 year ago
They approach infinity at different rates. neither actually ever get their. the ratio is not ever 1:1 even at n=inf else 1=4=9. True only if you are equally shredding a separate single posit into its root for every square set you sticky note together. If you are matching 2 sets into infinity and get 1:1: ratio then they are not dependent sets.
timothylcrowe1 1 year ago
Comment removed
timothylcrowe1 1 year ago
I see a moose knuckle.
3942842346 1 year ago
Infinite Mollies!
FluffyBunniesOnFire 1 year ago
Funny to see a cute girl act so intellectual. Thats not verry common....
weirdscience81 1 year ago
not a paradox but there is a camel
PentagonalAntiprism 1 year ago
I LOVE how this vlog switches from abstract to intelligent. Go rocketboom!
ellorybockting 1 year ago
Is wisdom a function of mathematics or is mathematics...oh never mind.
AcePilot101 1 year ago
This is not actually a paradox.
You can't quantify numbers, they do not exist beyond concept and thus themselves are uncountable.
TinyFlix 1 year ago
@TinyFlix Actually, the numbers can be representative of anything. Take 2 pieces of wood for ex. 1 is 1m long (each point along the length of represented by a number between 0 and 1), and the other is 2m long (each point being represented by a number between 0 and 2). Then the n-th point on the 1m piece corresponds to the 2n-th point on the other piece. This 1-to-1 correspondence means that each length of wood contains the same number of points.
technopagan724 1 year ago
As you can see, everyone is more concerned about her cameltoe than what she is actually saying, and I don't blame her. Her voice is fucking annoying.
Chucknorrisaurrus 1 year ago
your point?
funrizwan 1 year ago
OMG MOLLY IS A GENIUS
zengrz 1 year ago
Comment removed
zillertalernazihass 1 year ago
very cute girl...
FuBT504 1 year ago
@FuBT504 i know shes beautiful :)
MopGunZ93 1 year ago
What's with her bullshit fake English accent, anyone from merry old know's that in england they generally refer tho Mathematics as "Math's".
Bloody unbearable to listen to bad accents.
Please stop!!
bicycleview 1 year ago
shes from england, then moved to america
gbmov 1 year ago
@bicycleview Maths, not math's. The word maths is not possessive to anything in the context you're using it in. Plus, apostrophes aren't meant to be used to make plurals in such a way, and even so, mathematics is a plural, and maths simply is an abbreviation of it. Plus, perhaps you common people say maths all the time, but I, who is British, happens to use the word mathematics over the common abbreviation of it quite often, and many people I know also do.
stings2008 1 year ago
@stings2008 "I happens" is underminingly embarassing english. And why not use an abbreviation? It seems an unnecessary waste of time/breath to use the form with more syllables.
Aristox116 1 year ago
@bicycleview Also, despite any of that, such a thing as whether or not somebody uses an abbreviation of a word or the full word itself has no merit in the validity of somebody's accent. Plus, her unusual accent is to do with the fact she has moved around a lot, she is in fact originally from England.
stings2008 1 year ago
THIS IS WHY THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE WILL NOT BE EXPLAINED THROUGH MATH. iTS BEYOND CALULUS
etechjoe 1 year ago
@etechjoe fuck
snuutsen 1 year ago
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
Spironic 2 years ago
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
Spironic 2 years ago
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
Spironic 2 years ago
This is not a paradox. Infinity does not equal infinity. It's not a number. You can't say "there are the same number of big squares as little ones" because there is no number to say how many there are.
Spironic 2 years ago
I love mememolly but doesn't it annoy you a little when someone is talking about something that they know nothing about. It feels like they are saying 'you should learn this it is important... But I don't actually know it myself.' Oh, and camel toe, you should learn not to sit cross legged... I am a man... go figure.
curzmg 2 years ago
geile ficksau vom davis aus du geile schlampe!!
der davis würde dich am liebsten packen und nur noch nei stecken und ficken!!
abaer sonst find ich dich ganz süß xD
AichOhAich 2 years ago
bitch talk german!!!
AichOhAich 2 years ago
this girl is very cute...i dont know what she said, she sounds like she has marbels in her mouth, but who care...she is ver very cute.
cirosuperiore 2 years ago
@cirosuperiore Marbles? She's got a British accent... she not an idiot.
momothelemur 2 years ago
@momothelemur "SHE not an idiot." but you are
williamtom0 2 years ago
@williamtom0 lol... what a comeback!
momothelemur 2 years ago
camel toe on 1:15 thru 1:20
dcwhite123 2 years ago 91
@dcwhite123
it start at 1:09 too xD
dejkola 10 months ago
@dcwhite123 hahahahahaha!!!! you win
scubadude235 9 months ago
haha I'm looking at the comments, and I see a lot of people here just don't get it and say that she's talking too fast, when its really that they think too slow.
And most people here just give up on thinking at all and post a comment about cameltoes.
Conclusion: "Internets are more gooder than books"
pieguyfry22 2 years ago
epic cameltoe :D:D
MrHankyNr1 2 years ago
she bangin!
jdizzle99 2 years ago
cameltoe xD rls ^^
phYn0r 2 years ago
Comment removed
phYn0r 2 years ago
She is applicable to my interest
tobie007 2 years ago
5 stars for cameltoe :D
r3d3r3d3r3d3 2 years ago
LOL I just saw it after you said it. lol
MagicalSins 2 years ago
oh, molly, were it that the only universe remaining were you, i would enjoy every moment inside of you...
i am officially a perv....
bronlokis 2 years ago 4
the answer is that they are both infinite, one cannot speak about amounts because they ere infinite. So you cannot say there are more, less or the same amount because they are both infinite.
flixmsncom 2 years ago
Which is precisely what she said, or rather what Galileo said and she quoted. I do believe most people here had stopped listening by that point. Thanks for making sure it was heard, er, read.
ive2dimples 1 year ago
1:20 Camel Toe=Boner
snedie69er 2 years ago
another paradox that proves how infinity is irrelevant
uberbs 2 years ago
Of course it's relevant. Knowledge is always relevant at some point. You may not think of it on a daily basis, or even deliberately apply it to your life, but the concept in and of itself is most decidedly, relevant.
For example the very knowledge of whether something is likely to continue on to infinity or not helps scientists & mathematicians decide whether it's worth acquiring a specific number or whether the possibilities are infinite and they should therefore focus on something else.
ive2dimples 1 year ago
Hobbys!?!?!?!?
ConneKeule 2 years ago
for all those who have taken calculus. This is nothing more than a limit. x^2 approaches infiinity faster than x does in this series thus theree are more numbers than squared numbers.
HotSauce147 2 years ago
fit as a bastard
flyjunkie2 2 years ago
I don't see how it's a paradox? It's just infinity...
x08 2 years ago
I think the paradox is either a) you can't fill infinity b/c it's infinite and is therefore never full, or b) infinity is a measurement and therefore a number, but it can't actually be measured and therefore is not a number.
ive2dimples 1 year ago
x^2 approaches infinity faster
MrRawrger 2 years ago 2
she talks too fast.
astrofunkification 2 years ago
I dont get it...
laitho90 2 years ago
kk then what she meant that the number of little squars would be the same as big ones means..
Little Squares: 1,4,9,16,25
Big Squares: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
if they go to infinty
they are equal infinitly
entoris476 2 years ago
im happy that she isnt tall and skinny...
edwinrproductions 2 years ago 2
1:10 camels are treading on my toe
iamevildoing 2 years ago 48
yeah !
TheIkidsEde 2 years ago
hehehehe he surely is a guy lol only a guy whould notice that
bleu1ray 2 years ago
thank you man!! nice eagle vision
naisdik 2 years ago
@iamevildoing What the...?
MetalSwitch95 1 year ago
@MetalSwitch95 ahhhh the wonders of not knowing.
iamevildoing 1 year ago
@iamevildoing Nice to see people concentrate on what matters.
Kan2209 1 year ago
@iamevildoing good if you like molly enough to care go fap to it freak
VirtualCentral 1 year ago
@iamevildoing
Girl talks about mathematics and galileo, freakin viewer sees nothing but camel toe... epic :D
tenforce 1 year ago 112
@tenforce are you a camel toe hater :D
TheMegamania 1 year ago
@tenforce funniest shit ever...
ShankSays 6 months ago
@tenforce There's an infinite number of camel toes!
CataKlysmiC 6 months ago
@tenforce But it's no paradox it's normal.
Starioshka 5 months ago
@tenforce I miss good things like this because I'm always too busy staring at Molly's pretty face.
TheReaverOfDarkness 3 months ago
This video is N/A
TheReasonWhyGuy 2 years ago
using microphones would be nice too...
gin666x 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
check out 1:11 if you want to see her camel toe.
matty2000shoes 2 years ago
Molly, I love you. But you gotta read with your face out of the book. Oh, yeah, and fix that matting.
BOBMAN1980 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
cum to your blondie face my beauty
gosustarcraft 2 years ago
Is that cameltoe I'm seeing?
steviez33 2 years ago 3
perv
joshc007 2 years ago
yeah, so?
steviez33 2 years ago
oh shit 1:19
BigRedVelvetineJesus 2 years ago
So where is the paradox?
finnsia 2 years ago
Comment removed
Kiaczar 2 years ago
who cares what you think? maybe i dont think you did understand, maybe i think you dont even exist
robertwc82 2 years ago
maybe I don't exists, but there is no denying the fact that set theory exists, as it is even hinted at in this video
Kiaczar 2 years ago
who's denying the fact that set theory exists?
what i deny is that you are the only person out of 20, 652-ish veiws who comprehended what was said
lol
robertwc82 2 years ago
Oh, yes I agree....there is most likely a vast number of people on the interwebs that understood...but to me it doesn't seem that way when a majority of the comments have to do with how they think she is hot rather than the subject matter
Kiaczar 2 years ago
oh, ok. i thought you just felt that way from watching the video, if you got that impression from the comments, then thats different lol
robertwc82 2 years ago
Infinity is a concept, not a number. The idea of infinity is not mathematic, but just plain logical. It really means something unreachable so as long as you use any number in existence (maybe very complex, but still in existence) infinity is not in use. So really, infinity doesn't work well with other numbers at all. Trying to take infinity squared is like trying to take apple squared. What exactly is an apple, anyway?
ThisNameIsNotProfane 2 years ago
you're half right....
infinity is not a number, but it does share many properties with numbers
Additonally, there are different sizes of infinity (in fact there are an infinite amount of different infinity sizes)
Kiaczar 2 years ago
There can't be different sizes of infinity because infinity itself is by definition unreachable.
ThisNameIsNotProfane 2 years ago
if you knew anything about set theory you would know that there is an infinite sizes of infinity. eg, natural numbers (aka counting numbers) {1,2..} or {n, n+1, n+2..} this set is a countable infinity, since it goes on to infinity, but you can still in list all of them, in theory
and rational numbers (aka any number that can be written as a fraction) eg, a/b, with the one exception that b cannot equal zero, this set is a non-countable inf since you can always pick a new # between 2 rational #s
Kiaczar 2 years ago
But, when looking at the size of this "number", since you could use the number n+1 with n = infinity, wouldn't n+1 be infinity as well since it is just as unreachable as n?
ThisNameIsNotProfane 2 years ago
yes,youre right in that case, but n and n+1 are in the same set, you can't just add of multiply n by m to jump between sets. looking at the natural numbers you can list them like {n,n+1,...} and if I did this forever I would in theory be able to write down every number in the "infinite set" known as aleph null. Try to do this with the set of rational numbers (or irrational numbers). You can't because you can always find another rational#between any2rational#s,thus these sets have a greater inf
Kiaczar 2 years ago