 Let's make sure we're coming alive and there we are. Nice. Hi everyone, this is Gicho. Welcome to my channel and welcome to another live stream. Today, today is May 14th, 2021 and we're doing a drop in math tutoring session number 74 or thereabouts. Let's do a little bit of mathematics and we've done a lot of these as the numbering reveals, if not more so, and then creating math content online for 14 years, I guess. 13, 14 years coming out to 15 years, I guess. And so we've done a lot of work and this is just basically me making myself available for a couple hours every couple of weeks. So probably twice a month, making myself available to do some online math tutoring and we're doing these live streams on Twitch. Okay. And while we wait for people to roll in, and this is an open discussion, we're going to leave politics on economics, but economics is fair game for this stuff. And whatever we're talking about, mathematics takes a front center stage. So if anybody has any math questions, please let us know. I do have one thing lined up that we could take a look at regarding ratios and stuff like this, which I found interesting. But we'll leave that alone, see if it comes up. If you do have questions, we're left to our own demise, right? Aside from that, as far as the intro goes, I am on Patreon game, patreon.com forward slash chicho, C-H-Y-C-H-O. If you want to follow this work, Lord of Iron, how are you doing? I hope you're doing well. Welcome to another live stream. If you want to follow this work, patreon is a great way to do so. If you want to support this work, patreon is a great way to do so. I don't put anything behind paywall. Everything's paid of commons and layered on mathematics. For those of you who are supporting this work on Patreon, thank you very much for the support gang. It is an enlarged part because of your support that we're able to do what it is that we are doing. We are live streaming on twitch.tv forward slash chicho live, C-H-Y-C-H-O-L-I-O-L-I-V-E. If you want to participate in these live streams and if you have math questions that you want, help with the concepts that you want to understand. Twitch is where you want to come and attend these drop-in math tutoring sessions. People have been asking me on censorTube when I do these live streams and whatnot because we're not uploading everything to censorTube. They're going to all the other platforms. Gang, on my Patreon page, whenever I have streams, live streams scheduled, we pin the schedule on top of Patreon as well as subscribe star, but I don't have anyone supporting me there so I haven't been commenting. We're very subscribed, but basically we're doing mirroring everything that we do on Patreon on subscribe star. So if you are a subscribe star following the work there, the schedule gets pinned. So whenever there's a live stream schedule, there's live streams we're going to be doing, you can just go to our Patreon page and if there's a pin schedule, their schedule is not done yet. And we do have a discord page and a schedule folder where you can check our schedule there because I don't have a set weekly time that I do them. I do them when I can fit them in. My schedule is, I've never really followed a nine to five schedule, I go whenever I do. I do announce these live streams 30 minutes before we go live on Minds, Elo, not Elo, Minds, Gab, VK and Parler. And you can come to our Twitch channel anytime you want and type an exclamation mark, social, we could be live streaming or not. If you type an exclamation mark, social, all those links will pop up, including a link to our discord here where people are sharing a fair bit of information and you're definitely welcome to join us there. Slick mech, how are you doing? Here for math, anything we're covering on, covering on particular love vector last week. No, it's just an open discussion. I do have something lined up that if there is no math questions coming in or people needing help with certain math concepts, we can take a look at that. It's related to politics, but not, we're not going to get into the political discussion of it. It's the analysis of some data regarding three different channels on censor tube and whatnot, but it's neither here nor there. We can take a look at it anytime we want. For live streams that don't have any visuals, we do upload the audio to soundcloud.com forward slash chichou as a podcast and those podcasts should be available on your favorite podcasting platform, including Spotify and iTunes. Mathematics has visuals, so we don't upload the mathematics to SoundCloud other than some of the general math discussions videos that we've done way, way in the past. Slick Mac, now that I'm out of college, I have nothing to bring to the table upon all stay for whatever you have an awesome Slick Mac. And congrats being out of college. Is it just a summer break for you, yeah? You're going back next year, I'm assuming. And we will definitely load this live stream onto censor tube, pitchute, rumble, and odyssey. Censor tube gets all of our mathematics content, as well as all of our Julian Assange and WikiLeaks content and food content and comic books content. Some of the other stuff, probably not, probably not. Aside from that gang, welcome to another live stream in M.T.L. Buttyut saying I just graduated, but I love the chill math lives, nice, nice, nice. And congrats gang, congrats on the graduation. You're out of jail, what are you gonna do? I could have used you for my last exam. We do these on a regular basis, you should have popped in. But I haven't done, well no, the last math one we did was two weeks ago, so your exam might have been before then. Yeah, I dropped out to take a break, figure out, oh yeah, that's right, what I wanted. Going back to studying math in a year probably, okay, okay. Oh my god, how are you doing? It just, it's just modding today. Don't ask me to do math, please. You might like something that I got lined up. We'll see if we can get to it. Just because, just because. Aside from that gang, I hope you're enjoying your spring. And I'll give it a couple more minutes. If no math questions come up, we'll take a look at this thing. It just involves ratios. And it was something I heard watching a content creator on SensorTube that I, that I like. And something that he mentioned. And I figured I'd check the data. Like I've mentioned before, when I listen to people, when I, when I listen to lectures, you know, read books, read articles, you know, listen to interviews, whatever it is that I'm doing. If I'm consuming educational content, if I hear something which intrigues me, I could sort of pause and check it out, check out what they're saying, see if it's legit or if I interpret the same way. So one person I consume content on SensorTube, most of my video content now is off SensorTube, but this person doesn't have their content available on other platforms, so SensorTube it is, right? Or actually they do one of the other ones, but it's, if you, Slip Mac. When you can't decide whether to do a math or politics stream, so you decide to do a political math stream. And we've done a few of those, by the way. If you look at my previous content, we've done a few political math streams. They're in there, right? And I'm going to be doing more. We've got to get on the radar somehow, right? Liquid source, how are you doing? Is there a good way to calculate the shortest distance between two functions that doesn't, that don't intersect, one of the functions being a quadratic and the other one being linear? Yes, there is. Should we do, let's do it. This is a cool question, actually. By the way, they took this type of calculation out of the math curriculum in my part of the world, out of high school, so they don't teach this anymore. Angry Chicho. It brings out the angry Chicho, because this is a phenomenal question and different versions of it as well, right? Dio Exit Live. Thank you very much for doing this. So they don't teach this anymore, so I haven't taught this for this type of question or similar types of questions for eight years, at least nine years, which really pisses me off, because they're amazing. This type of stuff is super cool, right? Let's do this question. Other than that, I was watching an old video with your German friend from a few years ago, very interesting, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Dirk, the mathematics of art and design. Awesome, awesome. I haven't seen him for a while. Brando Hitz, how are you doing? It's duck season, rabbit season. Duck season, rabbit season. Not tutoring season. I mean session. What's up, duck? I mean, Chicho, how's it going? Brando, hope you're doing well. Gang, check out this question. The question is this, okay, and this is Lord Swords N1 posted it. Is there a good way to calculate the shortest distance between two functions that don't intersect? One of the functions being a quadratic, and it gives a quadratic equation. I'll write it down here. And the other one being a linear function. So let me write down the two functions first, okay? So the first function being a quadratic, by the way, I got new pens, I got new pens, it's going to be nice and right, equals negative x squared plus 5x. Okay, so that's our quadratic. Quadratic is a parabola, right? This one opens down, it's negative in front. The other one is a linear function. Let's call it g of x is equal to negative 2x plus 15. Now, keep in mind that it just doesn't have to be a quadratic and linear. It could be two linear lines that are parallel, and you want to find the shortest distance. It could be a linear line on a point, and what's the shortest distance? And you sort of follow the same technique that we're about to do here, okay? Let me get caught up with the chat, Speed of Gonzales style, high rando hits. MTL, I had one course last semester that covered a different branch of mathematics in each lecture. One week was linear programming, next was nonlinear programming, dynamic programming. Uncertainly analysis, that sounds pretty damn cool, man. Very cool. Yeah, Zarya, how's it going? Congrats on the graduates here. Yeah, indeed. Now, take a look at this thing. So, let me draw your visual as to what it is that we want to do here, right? The linear function is easy to graph, and this one is easy to graph. You could do a complete square if you want to graph it, but what we'll do, we'll find the x center steps, find the average, and just draw an approximate graph of it. Okay, so let's draw the graph here. This one is a linear graph, right? Which follows the principal y equals the x plus b. That's the y intercept. That's the slope, right? You go to the y intercept, and you do the slope. That's how you graph lines, right? So we're gonna go up to 15. Let's take it up here. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen. We go to 15. That's the y intercept. That's negative two. So it's negative two over one. So we go down two over to the right once, right? So you can think of it as negative two over one. Down two over one. So this is our linear graph. Okay. So this is G of x. And whenever you graph things on a Cartesian coordinate system, put the name of the function on there. That way, you can easily reference it to know which graph it is, right? Now this one, let's bring this one down here. And instead of doing completely square, let's just find the two x intercepts, and then take the average and find the coordinates of the vertex by plugging the average of the two x intercepts, right? If you don't know what I just said, watch. This is what we're gonna do. So we're gonna find x ends by setting f of x equal to zero, which f of x is your y, right? This is your x-axis. This is your y-axis, x and f of x, right? So what we're gonna do, we're gonna go negative x squared plus five x is equal to zero. And then what we're gonna do is we're gonna factor out an x, and we've got negative x plus five is equal to zero. And we've put out videos regarding this, the power of zero, the thing that zero allows us to do is if we have two or more things that multiply together to give us zero, we can set each one equal to zero. So we've got two things multiplied together to give you zero, and the only way that's possible if at least one of them is zero. So we're gonna set each one equal to zero, split this, and go x is equal to zero and negative x plus five is equal to zero. So x is equal to five, right? Those are our x-intercepts, okay? So x-intercept of zero, x-intercept of five. One, two, three, four, five. There's our x-intercept. This is a parabola. A parabola looks like this. This is opening down. We know it opens down because it's got a negative coefficient in front of the x-square. So it does this, right? But even if we didn't know that, what we're gonna do is we know it's symmetrical. So we're gonna find the average of zero and five. Average of x, it's average of x-sense is x average is equal to zero plus five divided by two, which is five divided by two, which is 2.5, right? So one, two, here it is. This is five over two. Now that's the x part of the vertex. It's the axis of symmetry, right? So we know that this guy, now this isn't part of the graph, it's just a mirror. The parabola is symmetrical along that mirror, right? Now what we need to do, we need to find the y associated with that axis of symmetry with the x part of the vertex. So all we do, we just plug in five over two for x. So we're gonna find f of five over two, which is equal to negative five over two squared plus five times five over two, which is going to be negative 25 over four plus 25 over two, which is going to be common denominators four. This is negative 25 plus multiply that by two, multiply that by two, 50. So it's going to be 50 over four, right? That's the x part, that's the y part of the vertex. So the vertex for this parabola is vertex is five over two and 50 over four, which is 25 over two. I'm just going to reduce it, right? Which is equal to 25 over two, 25 over two, which is 12 and a half, right? So what we're going to do is, we're going to go up to 12 and a half. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve and a half. Oh my graph really is touching it super close. What? 12 and a half. So let's say we're here, okay? And the parabola opens down, goes like this, and goes like this. Okay? Makes sense? So if we zoom into this area, right? It's unfortunate that they're so close together, right? Very unfortunate that they're so close together because it's hard to see this. But what we could do, as long as I got different colored pens, let's bring it up. MTL is a math tutor, even legit, if he doesn't have his own self-defense when drawing. So let's assume we're going to take this and zoom into here, right? So we're zooming into here. What you see here is this. Let me draw it in black as well. So this is our G of X, right? G of X. Really, it's too bad they gave the functions too close together. I would have given a function a little further away. So you could actually see where it is, right? And then here's the other function. The parabola looks like this. And you want to find the shortest distance between this line and this parabola. Okay. The shortest distance between this line and this parabola. And this parabola is F of X. Okay. Okay. I'm going to skip over, slip, make your comment there. Just continue on this. Okay. So what we're looking for is this. What's the shortest distance between this line and here? That's what we want. So how do we do this? Well, if you do this calculation, oh, actually we want to, it's got to be, there's something we're missing. Slip, make, there's one thing you need from here, from this question. It should be, oh, it should be 25 or four. That's right. I did a boo boo. This is, thank you very much. If you, if you find me making mistakes, please correct me. It should be 25 over four. I did it in my mind. That's why I didn't reduce it. And then, so it should be 25 over four. So four goes into 25, six times. So six and a quarter. That's way better. Let's erase this. So we don't even have to zoom in anymore. Let's kill this. Let's kill this. Let's kill this. But I think we need one bit of information, one more bit of info here. There it is. Let's say it's up there. So six and a half, one, two, three, four, five, six, six and a quarter. One, two, three, four, five, six and a quarter. So it would be here. Oh, that's way better. That's way better. So it goes like this. That's nice. Now we can see it, right? That also not my question. I think MLT asked. MLT asked would be the finding the purpose. Yeah, it's the purpose of your business, but we need a point on the line or a point on the parabola. We have to have a point. I'm pretty sure we have to have a point because the shortest distance, oh the shortest distance. Wait a second, the shortest distance. It would have to be at a point where this touches, right? Because the distance from this point to the parabola, the shortest distance. Wait a second. So check this out. This is my thinking, right? The shortest distance from a point is going to be the perpendicular. It's always going to be the perpendicular from the line, right? So if we have this, check this out. If we have this, right? The shortest distance from this point to the parabola is perpendicular. It's got to be at 90 degrees, right? The shortest distance from any point on the parabola is going to be perpendicular, right? So this question says, what is the shortest distance period, right? Now if they gave you the point, oh by the way, I think they meant the shortest distance, uh, y-wise. Oh, y-wise, not just in any direction. The distance between the two functions or the distance between the two functions are g of x minus f of x, okay? y-wise. Oh, that makes it easier. That makes it easier. I believe so, right? Why, yeah, does it make it easier? Y-wise. Because if it's y-wise, it would just be on the vertex, because that's the highest point that guy reaches. Is that correct? Is that correct? Is that correct? Would that be correct if it's the highest point? That's the highest point of the parabola, but if the line was going like this, I think it would just be to the vertex. Correct me if I'm wrong, gang? And liquid source is saying the distance between g of x and f of x, g of x and f of x would just be g of x minus, I should write this down, f of x, right? So let's create some rule for us to work. I'm going to take down all of this, okay? I'm going to take down all of this. No, I think it's a bit further than the vertex. Upper function minus lower function usually signifies a distance between them. Yeah, it does. You subtract them, right? So you're subtracting the y's. Let me erase all of this. This would have been really easy if they give you a point on the line or a point on the parabola, but they're becoming very general, right? Dr. Meng Metten. For small distances in x, 2x is greater. Yeah, that's the thing I'm thinking about, right? Because this is expanding at x squared, but if it's a really short distance, 2x is going to be greater than x squared, right? But this is a longer distance. So let's, first of all, let's do this. Let's see where this takes us. This question is not, I thought it was obvious what the answer was, but it's not as obvious, okay? Since the slope is lower for a while after the vertex. Yeah, but this thing's expanding speedy Gonzales style, right? So if it's the shortest distance, it's going to be very close to the vertex if it's not the vertex. Like it won't be over here because that's expanding way too fast now, right? So it would have to be within this region, right? Within here and here. Otherwise, you're already gone. It's past it, right? But the distance, distance between g of x and f of x, because g of x is your y, because they want the vertical distance, right? So they want this, what's the shortest vertical distance? So technically speaking, could just or visually speaking, could just do this, right? And you're going to pick the shortest line, right? That's what it means. That's what they're looking for, right? If it's just a y difference, then f of x and g of x are your y axes, right? And because g is higher up than f, we're just going to go g of x minus f of x, right? And then we're going to minimize that, right? Minimize what else? How do we go about minimizing? Let's do the subtraction first, and then we'll figure out how to minimize it, right? To minimize it. Okay, let's draw it out. Let's see what we end up getting, right? Or write it up. So g of x is going to be negative 2x plus 15 minus negative x squared plus 5x. So this is going to be negative 2x plus 15 plus x squared minus 5x. So it's going to be x squared minus 7x plus 15, right? Did I have any brain farts there? Did I have any brain farts there? Before I continue, because I made one brain fart before with the vertex. The vertex here was, what was the vertex? We didn't write it down here. Let's write it down here. Vertex for parabola, vertex was 5 over 2 and 25 over 4, right? That's this point here. Okay. Was also thinking that creating a new function that is this, then using derivatives to find the critical point. Yeah, you could do that. And here's the other thing you could do. You want to find the minimum of this, right? If you want to find the minimum of this, would it work if we just found the vertex of this? Because the vertex of this function, because it's a combination of this function and this function, generating a new function, the minimum should be the minimum. So all you really need to do is find the vertex of this and you should have the minimum. Okay? The y part of the vertex. Let's do both methods. Okay. Let's do both methods. So the new function is the distance functions. We're getting into complex numbers, I think. Are we getting it? I don't know. No, I don't think it should be complex. Is it? 49. Oh, crap. It is going to be complex. What the hell? This is going to be complex number. It is. The roots of this equation will be, yeah, it is complex. So that doesn't make sense, right? If we take the derivative, but that should do it. How come it's not going to do it? Did we have a brain fart? Or did I have a brain fart here? Did I have a brain fart here? Was that supposed to be plus 5x? Or did I write it down properly? Yeah, it's plus 5x. Because if we take the derivative, not the derivative, if we try to find the factors of this, they're going to be complex. Yes, plus, I think. Yeah, it is plus. I just scrolled up and it was plus. So that's not going to work. Okay, so let's call this deobags, the distance. So this function should give us the distance of the line and the parabola if I'm not mistaken, right? Expired sandwich. You're such a cheat. You're reminding of my late grandfather who was an amazing math tutor and carried me through high school math and you also remind me of one of my favorite priests who passed away last year suddenly. I love watching your content. Much love. Much love right back, expired sandwich. And by the way, the way I teach is exactly the way you see here. If a question comes up that I don't know how to do right off the bat, we work on it together because I'm learning something. My students are learning something. That's one of the reasons I love what I do because I'm constantly kept on my toes, right? So from what I understand, this should give us a different distance between the y's, right? Oh, check this out. Check this out. This thing, here's the reason. Here's the reason that this is going to be complex. Have you guys figured out why it's going to be complex? I can tell you why it's going to be complex. Should we do it? Hold on. I'm going to give you a couple of seconds to figure out if it's going to be complex or not. So we can't find the x-intercepts. We need to find the vertex. Okay. It's a passion. It's a distance, but there's a reason why it won't work. Because when we find the vertex of this, it's not going to cross the x-axis, right? Because one of the reasons the one is very big, yeah, because it's the x-square taking in versus 2x, right? So what's happening is it's trying to find the x-intercepts, the distance between the line and a parabola that's going crazy. I believe so anyway, right? Or no, it should. We do not need the plus 15. Well, you know what? I'm going to go find the vertex of it. We don't need the plus 15. How come? So we can just take that out. I don't know if we can or not. Could we maybe look at the discriminant of d of x to find the line of symmetry? The problem with the discriminant of the v of x or d of x, it's going to be an imaginary number. It's a negative number, right? But let's find the vertex of this thing. Find the vertex. Put those in there. Brackets. Divide this by 2. This is complaining the square, right? Square it. You get 49 over 4. Add and subtract that inside the brackets. x squared minus 7x plus 49 over 4 minus 49 over 4 plus 15. Grab this dookie. Kick it out. And this factor is that guy. So x minus 7 over 2 squared. That guy comes out, becomes negative 49 over 4. So add those guys together. It's 4. 60 minus 49. So it's going to be 11 plus 11 over 49 plus 11 over 4. So that's the vertex of this parabola, right? It's just a displacement in the y direction. The vertex is going to stay at the same x value for any constant. The vertex is going to stay same value x value for any constant. Think about that. Is that correct? The two questions will never meet. Equations will never meet. So I think it's complex. But I think the vertex, the y part of the vertex, is the shortest distance. Is it not? Isn't this the shortest distance? Right? And this is going to be the x part of it. So I believe, what's the problem? The problem is find the shortest distance, shortest vertical distance between f of x and g of x. Right? So if it's the shortest vertical, and we're not given any points to start off on the line or the parabola. So if we're given a point, it would be easy, right? Then you just find the perpendicular, you find the shortest distance. If it was just the shortest distance, if it's the y, you just find the distance between them, right? I thought we searched for the x. I think we got the x. So the shortest distance between, not the shortest distance, the point, the point where, would that be the shortest distance? It's the x part of it. So this would be 3.5. If I want to redraw this, I want to redraw this here. That way we get 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. So I'm getting 3.5. That's 7 over 2. You take the opposite side of that, and 11 over 4 is 2 and 3 quarters, right? 1, 2, and 3 quarters. So that's the vertex, and that thing opens up, and we don't care about that. So that's the vertex of the distance, right? So it would be, I believe, it would be here for the x part, 7 over 2, and 11. Well, no, no, it wouldn't be 11 over 2. We don't know what the point is, right? But I think this is the distance. It would be 2 and 3 quarters, would it not? Am I mistaken on this? That is, the x that gives the shortest distance and y. If it was the shortest distance, I'd use linear algebra. Yeah? Crafter? Does this channel cover differential? We've done a little bit of finding derivatives. A little bit. I mean, we'll find a derivative of this. What was the other method we're saying? Find a derivative and find the inflection point, right? Where it rolls over, where the slope is 0. And that would be, if you take the derivative here, let me do this in rid. So if you take the derivative of d of x, so d prime of x is going to be 2x minus 7, right? So d, so d prime of x is 2x minus 7, which is this guy. If you set d, d prime of x equal to 0, then you get 2x minus 7 is equal to 0, so 2x is equal to 7. So x is equal to 7 over 2. Which is also the same thing as, right? This is essentially minimization over convex set, right? I don't know. I don't know if that's what they call it or not. It could be, right? So Dr. Heng, is that correct? So the x occurs at 7 over 2 and the distance, the shortest distance would be 11 over 4, which is this is 11 over 4. That's the shortest distance, because our function was d of x was g of x minus f of x. Is that correct? This is actually really cool. I don't think, I haven't done a question like this teaching when they took it out. This complex of a question wasn't in the curriculum. They usually gave you a point and they said, fine, the shortest distance. So the solution is f prime of x equals f prime of g. No, I don't think so. I don't think so. Keaton should indeed be correct. Liquid source, 7 over 2 should indeed be correct. We have found the x value where the shortest distance occurs. But what is the shortest distance? So x is 7 over 2. Isn't this the shortest distance? Is this not the shortest distance? Because we're trying to find the minimum value. Because if this is the parabola, right? This is the parabola. It opens up. So we know the minimum is this, which is 11 over 4. Right? Okay, yeah, we have the same solution. True. I believe the answer is 11 over 4. Awesome. Great question. Fantastic. I love it. I've never done anything like this before. So cool. Okay, yeah, we have the same solution. So liquid source, were you guys doing this using doing the derivative? So if you did the derivative, you got the x value, how do you get your 11 over 4? Do you kick this back up to here? Find the two y's. Oh, that's what you would do. Check this out. That's what you would do. You have the same solution at the point. So what you do is do this. Here, let's do this in green since we've got lots of colors going on. Shortest distance from, that's exactly it. That's what it would be, right? That slope, the shortest distance between 3.5, 5.25 to the line that is the shortest is the line that passes through. I did use the derivative just now and plug it back in. Yeah, you plug it back in. The length of the line segment of the line. Yeah. So basically what you would do is plug in 7 over 2 for f in x here. So let's do this here. So find f of 7 over 2, which is, let me erase that. Here, let's complete this again. It was actually a question someone asked me on a Swedish math form. Just wanted to share it. Awesome liquid source. Super cool. I like it. Negative 7 over 2 squared plus 507 over 2. So this would be negative 49 over 4 plus 35 over 2, which is going to be, that's going to be 70. Here, let's do it. 4 negative 49 plus 70. What is that? A brain fart. 21, right? 21 over 4. Is that correct? Yeah, 21 over 4. The guy that posed the question didn't even know what a derivative was. Yeah, you don't need derivatives to do this, by the way. We did it without derivatives, right? So what you would do, this would be 21 over 4. That's the y part of this point. So this point is 7 over 2 and 21 over 4. And then you plug in 7 over 2 for g of x. So g of 7 over 2 is going to be negative 2. 7 over 2 plus 15. 2 kills 2. So that's negative 7 plus 15 is equal to 8. Does that work? 8. Did I do a brain fart? Oh, yeah. That's not that. This point, because that was a parabola, this point is 7 over 2 and 21 over 4. And this point is 7 over 2 and 8. So if you want to find the shortest distance between this point and this point, you just subtract the y values. And that should give us the same answer as 11 over 4. Let's check it out. Let's do this in the green here. We're all over the place. I love it. This is the way math should be, chaos. As long as you've been following the work, you know exactly what it is that you're doing. And we've got different color pens. Rock and roll. So we got 8 minus 21 over 4, which is common denominators 4. 8 times 4 is 32 minus 21, which is equal to 11 over 4. Rock and roll. Same answer. Right? Check's out. Awesome. Great question. Love it. Love it. Love it. Great question. So cool. So cool. Right? I gotta remember this question. Give it to some of my students. They don't do this anymore though, so they took it out. Crap. Right. Super cool question by the way. Thank you for that, Liquid Swords. You can go back and take a snapshot of this and here I'll step out of the way. Here's the solution. Follow the black color first and then the red color and then the green. Right? Fun, fun, fun. I love these types of things that all of a sudden you start thinking about how you go about doing something that you haven't done before. Right? Good for the brain. Good for the brain. Builds the connections a lot better, right? Builds the connections a lot better. By the way, gang, do you guys have snacks? I got my chocolates are back. This time they're not melting. We're sitting outside and the sun was sitting on it, so they melted. This is just vertical distance. Yeah, this is just vertical distance. Not the shortest. The shortest vertical distance. Just vertical distance indeed. MR slide or RM slide. It's math. We're all used to following a complex mess of work. I know. Man, if you can follow this, you're money, right? No spoon required, but I brought it anyway. It was yesterday's chocolate melted and was so delicious eating it with a spoon later. And gang, don't forget. Free Assange, free Assange, free Assange. Julian Assange is a publisher and journalist that is being crucified for trying to bring transparency and accountability of capital as power to humanity. For more information, see wikileaks.org, defend.wikileaks.org, or our Julian Assange and WikiLeaks playlist on censor 2. Dr. Heng Matten. This was super interesting. We could search for the shortest x distance now. Yeah, you could do the same thing. Shortest x distance. How would you do the shortest x distance? Free Assange. Liquisor got beer and chips. Imperial stout has become a favorite. Nice. I haven't had beer for so long. You don't know. I'm not sure either. I'm trying to think about it. How would you find the shortest x distance? You could. You could do this. Right? Flip these around. Flip them around. Do a 90-degree rotation on this. Make the xy and the yx, and then find the shortest distance between those two points. I think you can invert functions and do the same process. Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Right? But it's been a while since I've done this. Yeah, I think you should be able to do that. Right, Sly? Yeah. Take the inverse of the functions. Right? It might become tricky because now that's no longer quadratic. It's a radical. Right? I need to learn English as I did, not understand the class, and I was very interested in it. I hope to learn Don San. Yeah. Slowly. English is a hard language to learn. Choco. Choco milk. Right? Kieten. Yeah. Invert and just use the right half of GeoVax. Yeah. I think so. I think that's what you would have to do. Right? Oh yeah, that's the way to go. Yeah. It adds that one extra element. Right? Pretty cool, though. And the board would look messier. And remember, we already had to do some work to be able to graph it, to get our visuals. So we already did a little bit of racing. So this is a super cool question. Super cool question. I'm going to take these down, see if there's any other questions. If there isn't, we can definitely take a look at some ratios to confirm information from someone. Right? Okay. So the total distance is minimized when F of X is at 7 over 2 and 21 over 4, and GeoVax is at, where did you get 23 over 5 and 29 over 5? Ah, Kieten. I thought we got the points as, I erased it, as for GeoVax, it was 7 over 2 and 8. I believe that was the point of the vertical distance. Right? Yeah. And then if you're going to make it perpendicular, so it was like this, this point, this point was 7 over 2 and 8. This point was 7 over 2 and 21 over 4, 21 over 4, 21 over 4, that was the vertical distance. Right? And if you take this and make it 90 degrees, is that the point you're talking about, which is 23 over 5, 23 over 5 and 29 over 5, 29 over 5. Is that what you're referencing? Your vertical distance seems fine. Yeah. This minimum total distance, not vertical. Yeah, I believe so. Right? And that is easy to find. That would be easy to find, I believe. Right? Because all you need to do is find an equation of a line. Here, we could do it. You need to find the equation of this line. Right? Let's assume we don't know that yet. Right? The equation of this line is going to be y is equal to mx plus b. Right? Now, we need the m and the b for this line. Now, what was the g of x? g of x was negative 2x plus 15. I believe that was a function. Right? So, if this line is perpendicular to this line, then the slope of the perpendicular, slope of the perpendicular is going to be negative reciprocal of that. Right? Negative reciprocal of negative 2 is 1 over 2. You flip it and change the sign. Right? So, 1 over 2. So, that means we have m. So, y is equal to 1 over 2x plus b. Now, we need to find the b, which is the y-intercept. The y-intercept was over here somewhere. Right? The y-intercept would have been here somewhere. Right? So, we need to find that point. That's your b. So, all you got to do is plug in a point you know in that's going to be on the line to find your b. So, you're going to take this guy and plug it into here for x and y. You're going to get 21 over 4 is equal to 1 over 2 times 7 over 2 plus b. Okay? So, this becomes 21 over 4 plus 7 over 4 plus b. Bring the 7 over. So, that's going to be 14 over 4 is b. So, you just found the equation of the line, this line, the perpendicular line to the other line. Right? So, y is equal to a half x plus 14 over 4. So, now all you need to do is find the intersection of this line and this line. Right? And to find the intersection of that, you set them equal to each other. Right? You want to find out at what point or what point exists on both this line and this line. Right? Well, that means you want to find the y there. Right? The x and the y there. So, you set them both equal to each other. You set g of x, set g of x equal to y. Right? That means you set that equal to this. So, you're going to get negative 2x plus 15 is equal to a half x plus 14 over 4. Multiply everything by 4 to get rid of the nominators. Right? You're going to get negative 8x plus 60 is equal to 2x plus 14 and then solve for x. Here, I'm going to grab the negative 8 and bring it over. So, that's 8x. I'm going to grab 14 and bring it over. It becomes negative 14. So, you're going to get 10x is equal to 46. 46 divided by 10. So, x is equal to 23 over 5. Is that what we got? Yeah, the x is 23 over 5. Right? So, that's correct. 23 over 5. And then, if you want the y, all you've got to do is just plug this in either in for this x or this x. You're going to get the same y out. It doesn't make a difference. Right? Because that's what you were doing. So, let's just plug it into, which one is easier to plug it into? If that one is easier to plug it into, obviously. Right? So, let's find g of 23 over 5, which is going to be negative 22 times 23 over 5 plus 15, which is going to be negative 46 over 5 plus 15, common denominator is 5. So, that's 60, which is going to be, what is that? 14? Oh, we didn't get 29. Did I have a brain fart? Did I have a brain fart? 15? Oh, it's 5. Not 4. So, this is 75. Right? 75. Okay. So, that should be 29. Here, 75 minus 46 is 615 29. So, that's 29. So, it's going to be 29 over 5, which is the y point. Once you got that, you have this point and you have this point, and then you use your distance formula, which is Pythagorean Theorem, which you're doing the triangle. You subtract the two y's. You subtract the two x's. You get your x and y distance there, and then you do a squared plus b squared equals c squared. Right? Nice combination. Right? Yeah. And the way you find that 7 over 2, 21 is the correct point to start from on f of x is by setting the derivative equal to each other, setting the derivatives equal to each other. The slope. Okay. You can layer and layer and layer and layer. Keep on going with it. Right? Super cool. And then you just do a squared plus b squared, like I mentioned. Right? Super cool question. Super cool question. Multi-layer. This type of question would be if they gave you a point for parabola and a line, and they said it was the short assistance between the line and the parabola or the parabola and the line, that would be more of a grade 11 question. Grade 10, grade 11 question. If it was two lines, parallel lines, it was grade 10. They took it out 10 years ago. Don't teach it anymore. Too complicated. Right? Don't want to make children too smart. They might question the system. Right? They might figure out how to work around the system. Right? So our centralized education system is more geared towards indoctrination, not education. Right? But that was about 10 years ago they used to teach that in grade 10. Because this involved parabolas, well, you had to find the equation of parabola. It would have been grade 11 that they would have a question like this. If it would involve derivatives, it would have been grade 12. I love this channel. Awesome styles. PG styles. Thanks, me too. Fun stuff. Great question. Great question. Super fun. Super fun. Good way to get the brain working. Cool, cool, cool. And I love having these new pens. Bright. Math confuses me. The only reason it confuses you is because you might be trying to learn mathematics at a level that you're not prepared for. And the reason that might be is because our education system is pure garbage. So you really have to teach yourself, Lola, mathematics, do so. It's good for you. Okay? They made me too smart, but that's cool in the 1980s. And by the way, gang, in the 1980s when I was in high school, the math curriculum was probably 30 to 40% more content than it is now. Like, no joking, right? 30 to 40% more mathematics was being taught to students in the 1980s than it is now. Just think about how absurd that is because mathematics rules our world a lot more now than it did in the 1980s. And what they've done is they dumbed down the curriculum where they're not empowering human beings to be what they want to be, right? Unfortunate, unfortunate. Dr. Heng, does that mean we also have a right angle at the point of the parabola? Tangent to the parabola. Because the parabola is always curving, you can't really have an angle to a curving thing. So it would have to be the tangent to the parabola, right? So it would have to be at this point where the lines we're meeting, the tangent of this parabola would be parallel to that guy, right? And that would be 90 degrees. Yeah, tangent. Oh, you've been learning from it? Awesome, Lola. I'm glad you're enjoying this. It's fun, really. Someone says something about a kissing number to me the other day. I have no idea what that means. Kissing number, I don't know what a kissing number is. What's, it's not 69, is it? Kissing number? Should we do a little bit of mathematics that's more on a simpler side? I have some data, it would be cool to take a look at. But it's up to you guys. If there's any questions that you need help with, that you want to talk about, we could do. And gang, again, don't forget, freeassange, freeassange, freeassange. Julian Assange is a publisher and journalist that has been crucified for trying to bring transparency and accountability of capital as power to humanity. For more information, see wikileaks.org, defend.wikileaks.org, or our Julian Assange and Wikileaks playlist on censor 2. Well, maybe 69 is the answer. Depends who asked the view, right? Depends who asked the view. Should we do some ratios? Because with ratios, you could almost rule the world, right? I've got Assange's Google interview book to read. Awesome. Awesome. I have a super difficult riddle. Not sure if we will be able to solve it here in time, but I would be interested to see you to tackle it. Sure, drop it in. Fit ratios. I'm bad with shapes. This one, the ratios I have is not shapes. You can drop the riddle for us, Dr. Heng. We can think about it. If I don't know it off the bat, we might do the ratios and let that question bounce around the head a little bit and see if an answer will come up. Why not? Always good to challenge. Is it a math riddle? I'm usually pretty bad at riddles, to tell you the truth. If I was a victim of the riddler, I'd die. He'd kill me. Solve this riddle to free yourself. So here's the question, I believe. At least it took me like forever. Maybe it's easier for you. Three points A, B, and C are placed at random on a circle of radius R. What is the probability that the triangle ABC is acute? Acute is smaller than 90 degrees, the angle of two. I always forget the names. Acute is less than 90, right? And this is probability. Yeah, this would take me forever. As soon as you introduce probability, it's like, dang. Because they took probability. They used to teach probability in high school, in my part of the world. They took probability out of high school about 12 years ago, 10 years ago again, right? They revamped the curriculum and dropped 30% of the content. So basically the question is this, the riddle. You got a circle of radius one, radius of one, radius of one. Point A, B, C. A, B, C. And they're placed at a random on a circle. What is the probability that the triangle ABC is acute? So basically they're saying they want this, but all the angles have to be less than 90 degrees. Right? All the angles have to be less than 90 degrees. So the way I drew it is not going to be the way it would be drawn. Let's assume it would be A. Oh, wait a second. What does it mean for a triangle? Yeah, there's no angles greater than 90 degrees. So all these angles are less than 90 degrees. So the way I drew it, here, let me draw it better. That way visually it's more appealing, right? So if you have this, so it would be like this and the radius is one. Okay, so that means the distance from here to any point is one. To there is one and to there is one. I'm pretty sure this has a lot to do with it. You would have to start off something like that and then all triangles by definition have at least two acute angles. Okay, all acute. Yeah, all acute. Yeah, by definition they have to have at least two acute angles, right? So they're all acute. They all have to be less than 90 degrees. So if they're all less than 90 degrees, if the radius is one, right, you could do this and this plus this plus this has to equal 360, right? There's no other stipulation of, see, it goes into probability. I can't do the probability aspect of it. I haven't done probability on this, right? But I think this is the way you would have to approach it. I believe. Is this the way you approached it, Dr. Hain? To get an idea, to get a, because once you do this, once you do this, then you would have to figure out a point, a limit, where this angle becomes less than, less than what? Could you use the fact angles? Yes, yeah. It's a good start. It's a good start. I think this is where you would have to start. Could you use the fact that they're all, they all need to be on the same semicircle to have an angle greater than 90? Could you use the fact that they all need to be on the same semicircle? But they don't all need to be on the same semicircle. And if they are all in the same semicircle, as long as they're not exactly equidistant, they must have an obtuse. Yeah, obtuse, yeah. If they're both, if all three on the same semicircle, then the angle would be obtuse. So that doesn't work, right? Elder God. An acute angle. Okay, this is definition. An acute angle or an acute triangle or acute angle triangle is a triangle with three acute angles less than 90 degrees. An obtuse angle or obtuse angle triangle is a triangle with one obtuse angle greater than 90 degrees and two acute angles. Yeah. To be non-acute, they do, I think. Yeah, to be non-acute, they do. They would have to be on the same semicircle, right? Yeah, I wouldn't know how to go about it. Nice question, though. Difficult. Difficult. But this is the way I would start it. This is the way I would start it. And then if you find the answer, if you know, well, you know the answer, go to our Discord page and post the solution, please, Dr. Heng. Here's our Discord page. We have a math folder or math folder and heavy topics. Not the way I would have wrote it. Dr. Heng says, yeah, very difficult. Feel free to pivot away from it. Yeah, I took it down. I'm like, I would have to spend all day trying to figure it out and look things up, right? So can that be used somehow? You get a free choice on the first two points. Yeah. But then the third is very constrained for where it can't be and still be acute. Yeah. And here's the thing. You're looking for the probability, not the possible angles. So this is like rolling dice. Let's check this out. So that's very good, by the way. SSTA. I did that problem at school, but I can't remember. So basically, your first choice anywhere doesn't matter. Your second choice anywhere doesn't matter. Your third choice cannot be in the same semicircle as the other two. Right? So the problem would be the semicircle could be, if this is the center, could be from this point all the way to the other point. So if you drew, that's a semicircle. That's a semicircle. So if you put any, the point anywhere along here, you satisfy the question. Right? So the probability would just be that. Right? I did that. Is that correct? So if you do this, let's take it to the extreme. Let's say you put one there and you can't put it exactly on the opposite side. Let's go, you put it here, just off that thing. Then the other point could be anywhere along here. So are you close to 50%? I don't know. That doesn't make sense. Yes. That's the picture that was in my head. I don't know how to translate that to probability. Well, the probability would be you could put the point anywhere along here. So you could get as close as you want to this point, to the diameter, the semicircle. And as long as you don't touch it, because as soon as you touch it, you're going to get a triangle that's obtuse. Right? Then any point along here would make a triangle that's all angles are acute. So are we talking 50%? Dr. Heng? 50%? No. You got a 50% probability of creating a triangle that's acute. That seems way too high. Something we're not considering here. No, no, it's way too high. But the allowable arc, you can pick the third point from changes depending on where the first two points are. I think, yeah, it would really depend on the first two points. Also, I think in the picture below, it would be close to 100. Would it be? Let's assume here we'd be close to 100%. Well, no, because all of the points on here would not be included. The probability of third point producing acute triangles continuous function of the choice of second point, hence the integral. Is it integral? 66%. Is it beat? Because check this out, like any point here would make all these angles acute. Right? As long as this point is not on it. Does 90 degree count as acute or not? No, it doesn't. 90 degree is 90 degree triangle. It's not acute. Oh, you do not go through the center in the problem below. No, you don't go through the center. You're not through the center. Right? You can't be on the center. Otherwise, this becomes 90 degrees. Right? Like, that's the circle. If you go through it, if it's a diameter, then any triangle here makes this 90 degrees and you can't do that. If you pick the first two points as diametric, then all choices on the third point are 90 degrees. As long as the points aren't superimposed. Yes, that is what I meant. Yeah. So we just have to be off that. Right? That's why I said it is close to 50%. Because as soon as you hit it, it's 50%. But okay, so 50% is too high. 50% is too high. 50% is too high. So there's something else at play here. And it is a relationship between this. Because let's say the two points go the other extreme. Let's say this point and this point. Then what do you have to play with? Go through the diameters. You can only have a point in here for it to be to work. Right? So how do you incorporate that with that? How do you incorporate the two? Exactly. Yeah. Interesting. Interesting. I'm not really sure how to go beyond that. I think I saw a variable answer and I remember. Sorry. It was 1987. 97. Yeah. So 0.5 is a way too high upper bound. It's a way too high upper bound. Because the two points, the first two points, could be very close together. If they're very close together on the extreme end here, on the extreme end, if we draw a circle, let's assume the two points are extremely close together. If they're both going through the center, then you're limited to this. So if you did it this way, then that would be almost 0%. If you take the average, 50 and 25 is 0. So 25%. Was it the answer? Dr. Hey, 25% probability that you can make an acute angle. No, it can't be that simple. Right? Knowing math, the answer probably involves Pi, yeah. Yeah. Pi somehow and maybe E as well. Yeah, maybe some of those, some of the magic numbers, right? And 0 and 1, right? Fun. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Crazy cool though. If you do have the answer post it in our Discord page, Dr. Hey, maybe cool to see it, especially if there's visuals with it, just to get a better visual of this, right? Funny enough, 25% is correct, but I think the argument is not, yeah, 25% is correct. So the math, one bound would be 50%. The other bound would be 0. Take the average is 25. Now, if you, and if you did it that way on a test, would you get marks for it? If I was a teacher, I'd give the mark. I would, because it would be, the person went through the logic trying to figure it out, right? And because we did it this way. So it is 25%, really. I wonder if this is a legitimate way of doing it, by the way. I wonder if this is legitimate way of doing it. Also, 75%, I can visualize the geometry, but I have no clue how to make it into probability. Very interesting problem though, very interesting problem, right? I'm more of an engineer. I write code to pick a lot of random points and count to see if that gave me an insight. Yeah, maybe I'm confused. I don't know how to do God. 75% would be the opposite of the 25%, right? I did it very similar to the way El Ligod lined it out. Really? Let's check it out. How did El Ligod line it out? I missed it. Oh, I didn't. Oh, there it is. El Ligod, the probability of the third point producing an acute triangle, is a continuous function of the choice of the second point, hence the integral. So you need to go to integral. That's something, I'm not going to go. It's a variable of the second point. It's a variable of the second point, which is what we're doing visually, right? But I don't know how you would go about it with the integral. Yeah, but maybe it's way too complicated now that you came up with this rationale. This rationale seemed logical. I don't know if it's like, how do you prove it? That's the kicker, right? I think try and stuff out to see if it leads to something that looks sane is a valid approach to finding an answer. Then you can try to find a way to actually solve it. Usually that involves induction just to mess with me. Yeah, and prove some horrendous stuff. So I like a lot of logical reasoning through things, but integral over the angles, at which point a non-acute triangle comes out. Should we do something very simple, mathematics, ratios? Should we do a little bit of ratios? That's a little bit of ratios. I'm going to give you guys, here's analysis that we can do. Okay, simple analysis that mathematics, the power that mathematics gives you. If you want to confirm something, okay, type it out at some point, but I like your solution. Maybe there's a nice way. Thanks, luck maybe, right? So here's the power of ratios, right? Here's what ratios will do, is confirm or deny something you've heard, allows you to look into something a little bit more in depth, to find out if there's a valid argument towards something or not, right? Basically, ratios, if you understand them, you could do almost anything that you want to do, right? Now, yesterday or day before, a couple of days ago, I was listening to Jimmy Dory, right? And if you've been watching my work, and if you've been watching anybody's work on SensorTube that is an independent creator, you'll know, this is related to, just in case, just in case. Now, this is related to something that all independent creators on SensorTube have encountered, which is basically SensorTube has modified their algorithms to demote independent content creators and to promote centralized power, right? Those who they consider to be authoritative figures, and the authority that they're getting that they have is basically money, right? So basically, they've been promoting anybody or any institution that is extremely wealthy and independent creators, they've been demoting, right? Either by deplatforming, shadow banning, messing around with their stats, unsubscribing people from their channel, not doing the subscriber counts correctly and whatever, and not promoting them, not recommending them and all that jazz, right? So I was listening to Jimmy Dory a couple of days ago or so, and I've heard him say this before, but this time I decided to look into the numbers, look into the stats and see what's what, right? And he mentioned a channel, views on a certain channel, shadow banning is basically not even in a search, like if you go to SensorTube and you found a video that might be a little bit controversial and you type in the exact title of that video in the search, it won't even show up, right? Like doing a search on a search engine, on any platform, where they don't even show you the results of the exact phrases, the content that you're trying to find, that's shadow banning, right? Where's I follow? Yeah, I don't get notifications for any YouTube SensorTube channels that I follow, right? My pleasure, Dr. Hanek. Now check this out. Jimmy Dory, when I was watching his content, he was talking about democracy now. Democracy now used to be a news platform that I used to follow and it was very unfortunate seeing him go just total shite. They just became crap after 2006 because they got into Russiagate and they were propagating just garbage, just lies from centralized power, right? It was just insane. The kitty cats are wrestling, right? It was just insane. So I stopped consuming their propaganda because it just became propaganda. They used to do legit, accurate reporting, but no longer, right? And Jimmy Dory was ripping them a new one. He was just trash talking. I'm like, up the yin-yang. He did that with democracy now and he did that with the young Turks. And the young Turks, years ago, I watched like one or two of their videos. I realized they were just pure propaganda, just garbage. So I didn't consume any of their information. I know Jimmy Dory came out of the young Turks, but one of the reasons he left the young Turks was because they were censoring them and stuff like that. So that's the sort of an intro to this, right? But basically, Jimmy Dory said this and he keeps on saying this. He said, if you take a look at the number of subscribers that the young Turks have and the number of subscribers that democracy now have, they're more than what Jimmy Dory has. But Jimmy Dory gets more views than those guys, right? Even though Jimmy Dory's subscribers are less, even though Jimmy Dory is basically to a certain degree shadow bad, his content is not promoted like the way it is democracy now, the young Turks and all that jazz, right? Dory, D-O-R-E, Jimmy Dory, or D-O-O-R-E, I believe. Now check this out. He brings on people that he interviews there that lay down facts like mad, right? From Aaron Mate to Max Blumenthal to tons of people that are on the ground, foots on the ground, telling people where it's at, right? But we won't get into the politics of it, right? Here's the stats for Jimmy Dory, democracy now and the young Turks, right? I'm going to write down some of their info, right? Jimmy Dory or D-O-R-E, right? So Jimmy Dory, Jimmy Dory. Actually, let's make a little bit of room here. Let's do this. Jimmy Dory, Jimmy Dory, democracy, oops, not M, democracy now, democracy now, and the young Turks, pure garbage, propaganda up the yin and yang. They don't know what the hell they're talking about, right? Here's the stats, daily views, daily views. And here, I'm just going to social blade to grab the general stats here, right? So here is, I'm just going to link this up on our Discord page. So that's social blade for Jimmy Dory. You can find the democracy and young Turks on there too. So daily average views, right? Weekly average, average, weekly average. Okay. And then you got last 30 days, last 30 days. And then we have video views, video views, last 30 days. Oh yeah, then we have subscribers. So I'm going to give you two stats here. One is subscribers and the other one is, should we do subscribers? Yeah, let's do subscribers too. Daily views, and then I'm going to do daily subscribers. Here, let me take this off. So daily views, actually, let's do it this way. Let's make it nicer. We're going to create a table. So daily, daily view, and then subscriber, weekly, weekly view. Let's kick this up a little bit. Weekly view, and subscriber, and then monthly view, and subscriber, right? So Jimmy Dory's daily view is 100, oh sorry, subscribers 100, views 216,000. So subscribers 100, daily, and 216,000 views daily. Weekly subs is 700, and 1.5 million weekly views, 1.5 million. Okay. And last 30 days, number of subscribers is 3,006.5 million approximately. Okay. Let's do democracy now. Young Turks is garbage, garbage, garbage, garbage. Right? Oh yeah, let's do total subs, total subs. Total subs for Jimmy Dory is 666,000, or sorry, 866,000. Okay. Thanks, Elder God. I almost forgot. Very important metric. Okay. Now, let's go to democracy now. Democracy, total subs is 892,000. Here, let's do, let's put the 1,000. 866,000, 892,000, 892,000. Okay. And let's bring out the democracy now, stats. Daily views, sorry, daily subs is 300, daily views is 134,000. Can you see the difference right now? Can you see the difference right now? On censor tube, Jimmy Dory is only getting 100 subscribers per day average. His views is 216,000. Look at democracy now. They're getting 300 brand new subscribers a day, but their views are 134,000. Wait a second. I see some kind of discrepancy here. Okay. Anomaly happening already with the first stat we look at. And they have approximately same number of subs. Total subs. So something's going on. There's less people watching democracy now, but they're getting more subscribers. Interesting. Let's check it. Look at this. Weekly is 2,000. Here, we'll do it. 2,100 subscribers. They're getting new. Total views, 940,000. 940,000. Again, 3 times, 3 times more subscribers, but their views are less. What's going on here? 9,000 subscribers on a monthly basis and their views 4 million. Interesting. Interesting. Now, let's look at the young Turks. Now, the young Turks have have a total of 5.2 million subscribers. Wow. That's a lot, right? But look at this thing. Their average daily subscriber count is not available, because I'm assuming they turned it off. Right? They turn it off. Their views, daily views is 972,000. 972,000. Okay. 972,000. And take view counts on sensor tube and subscriber take stats coming out of sensor tube with a gigantic grain of salt, right? Because they're fixing the numbers. There, we can't even get the daily new subscribers for young Turks, because I'm assuming they turned it off. Why would they turn it off? Their weekly views is 6.8 million. 6.8 million. And no, we can't get a weekly count. And their total views is 209 million monthly views. And sorry, we can't get a 30-day average. Right? That said, you can go to what he calls social blade and do a, at top, you can do a detailed stats. And it shows that in the last month, they've had a 10,000 new subscribers. In the last month, they've had 10,000 new subscribers. Right? Because you can do the detailed stats and it does it on a monthly basis for a month. So we can extrapolate that in one month, maybe they had 10,000 new subscribers. Right? 10,000, which means their growth rate is compared to Jimmy Dory, right? Because they got 5.2 million subscribers. Jimmy Dory is only God this much. Right? So what you can do is just do straight up ratios. Right? Blast me. Treachery is what I see. Treachery is what I see. Right? So I was doing this to fact check Jimmy Dory. Right? Because I love the math. Right? Maybe 12,000 would be nice. Well, and this is, I don't know about this. It's coming up from censor too. So I don't know if it's legit or not. Right? Hi, sir. After this, could you cover functions and mathematics? After this, I'll try. I'll try. Let's check it out. Let's just do some straight up, really simple algebra. Right? Let's look at the ratio. So right away, you know, democracy now is done. Right? Is growth on YouTube larger than nature? You know what? Growth on YouTube really depends on how how how censor tube is fixing the numbers. Right? And what they're doing in the background. Math, I see an algorithm which is biased as F. Yeah, it's totally. As soon as I saw it, if you're used to looking at these numbers, you're going to go, okay, whatever. Right? So right away, you can you can say that democracy now is on the decline. I don't care if this is showing, oh, you know, they're getting new subscribers. Their view counts are just garbage. Right? And there's a reason why they're garbage because they were propagating just garbage. Right? They were into Russia gay and all this crap. And it was all proven to be false. And they were using words that were really biased and geared towards generating hate and fear. So and I was an avid democracy now, watcher for a number of years. Right? Because their coverage of Middle East and Latin America was pretty good. But when it came to U.S. policy and European foreign policy, and they just went down the toilet. Like it was it was so sad to see. So democracy now more subscribers than Jimmy Dory. Right? Continues to get more subscribers than Jimmy Dory three times more subscribers than Jimmy Dory. But their view count is way less than Jimmy Dory. Right? Way less than Jimmy Dory. And if you just punch in the numbers, I mean, you don't need to do this anymore. Right? You could go one, three, four thousand divided by two hundred and sixteen thousand and Jimmy Dory was really talking about democracy. Now democracy now is getting sixty-two percent of the views. Democracy now is getting sixty-two percent of the views of Jimmy Dory. But they have three times more daily subscribers than Jimmy Dory, which accounts for three times more new subscribers than Jimmy Dory per month. Right? And the total subscribers are higher. Cyber mass. Thank you very much for the tier one sub. Mark Metals. How are you doing? Long time no see. Mark Metals. Primer number five. Yes? No. I found one of the copies I had. I think you were the one that mentioned it. Right? I'm not sure if you did or not. Hello my friend. Hello Mark. How are you doing? I hope you're doing. Yeah. Seriously. Are you still interested? Yes? It's not a great shape. I got to look at it. Right? You send me a message and during the next comic book stream when I have the tripod set up where we're going to do a reading, I'll show you the book. Okay. I got to find it again. I hope I'm buried. I'll find. I'll show you the book. You let me know what you think the great is. You make me an offer. Okay? But you have to see it because I don't want a grade for someone, for a friend. I want you to set it. Okay? You let me know. Okay? I don't know when it's going to be. I'll message me PM me and next time on the next stream, next stream I set up. When do you think you would do that? I don't know. It'll be in the next couple of weeks anyway. My schedule got, I already had it set up to do, but my partner's schedule got a little bit messed up because she's a nurse and they're really under pressure. So I adjust my schedule according to my partners. Okay? Okay. PM me, brother. I only found one of them. I got one graded for myself actually a while ago, but I have raw. Okay? Now check this out. So democracy now, garbage. If you're watching democracy now, stop. One of the reasons their view counts are down the toilet is because they've been propagating BS. Right? Now let's look at the young Turks. The young Turks, let's just do a straight up multiple. Right? Young Turks are getting 972,000 views according to sensor to 972 divided by 216. So I did multiply pooper scooper 972 divided by 216. 4.5 times more views. 4.5 times more views. Actually let me put it up top because that's where we're putting the relationship. Right? So 4.5 times more views on a daily basis. Take that with a gigantic grain of salt. We'll do my friend. Awesome, Mark. Thank you. I mean, keeping an eye out to see if you're sure or not. Right? So 4.5 times more views and Jimmy Dory. Right? And this would continue here too. So this is going to be 4.5 times more than that. But let's just do the calculator. 29,000 divided by 6.5. You get 4.46 which is 4.5. So 4.5 times more views. Right? Now let's do the multiple here. 5.2 million divided by 0.866 because that's less than a million. Right? 0.866. They have 6.35 times more subscribers. Right? And if we assume that they're getting 10,000 new subscribers per month because if you do the on social blade, right, they're getting 3,000, oops, 3.3 times more subscribers on a monthly basis. Right? So the views are 4.5, 4.5 times. Subscriber count is going through daily going through social, social blade is only 3.3 times more subscriber growth per month. But the total subscribers is 6.3 times. Right? Now what you can do and I did this for some of them, if you go to the front page of all of these channels, you'll find out that Jimmy Dory's videos, the new ones that he puts out, get more views than Democracy Now and the Young Turks. Right? So Jimmy Dory with, Jimmy Dory with 866,000 subscribers, his new videos get more views than Democracy Now, which is garbage, as well as a lot of them, as well as the Young Turks, who has, they have 6.5, 6.3 times more subscribers than Jimmy Dory. Right? I don't understand the other math, but this is easy. Yeah, this is so easy to pick. Here, I'll do it for the Young Turks because they're crashing and burning. They're crashing and burning. Here, I'll give you the numbers for some of these. Right? Here is Jimmy Dory's, now if you want, you do the count. Here's Jimmy Dory's last videos. First one he put out, it was 20 hours ago. Right? And I'll give you the Young Turks as well. This guy's face is a joke. Right? I'll pick same time frame, same time frame, same time frame. Oh, come on. Okay, check this out. So Jimmy Dory put out a video 20 hours ago, and I'm going to go with the same time frame because that's the most recent video Jimmy Dory put out. Jimmy Dory, 20 hours ago, 50,000 views. 22 hours ago, 94,000 views. One day it goes 62,000 views. And then one day it goes 64,000, 90,000, 63,000, 63,000. So that's the first two were 20 hours ago, and the last five were a day ago. And the range, their 62,000 is the minimum, 90,000 is the maximum from a day ago. Right? Here's the Young Turks. From 18 hours ago, they got 68,000 views. Right? Remember, remember, remember. Young Turks has 6.3 times more subscribers than Jimmy Dory. Right? From 18 hours ago, they got 68,000 views. Right? 17 hours ago, they got 38,000 views. 17 hours ago, 43,000 views and so on. Right? One day ago, one day ago video they put out, 64,000, 30,000, 130,000. Wow. Oh, you know why they got Trump's face on that one. Jimmy Dory doesn't put Trump. Well, no, he does, I guess. But he doesn't really, does he? I haven't seen a Trump face on Jimmy Dory forever. Right? So Young Turks, 64,000. Let's write these down. Really, I've got to write these down. So we're just going to go with the one day ago. Right? One day ago, they got 64,000. These are in thousands. 30,000, 130,000, 54,000. They put out a lot of crap videos, don't they? Oh, here it's getting to the end. 54,000, 34,000, 34,000 again. Okay. 94,000, 33,000 and 31,000. 33,000 and 31,000. Right? That's how many videos they put out. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Okay. Jimmy Dory, does someone want to do the average of these? Do you have a calculator you want to do an average of these? Here's Jimmy Dory one day ago. 62,000, 64,000, 90,000. Right? 63,000. I'll do this one. Someone else, if you got the calculator going, if you want to do that one, let me do this one. Definitely a pattern. Definitely a pattern. That's why Jimmy Dory rocks. Right? You fact check his stuff. You find he's telling the truth, man. 62 plus 64 plus 90 plus 63 divided by four. So average Jimmy Dory, 69,000, let's say 70,000, 69,000 and 0.75. Right? Here, I'll do that because I haven't seen the average yet. I'm going to do the average for young Turks, young garbage. 64,000 plus 30,000 plus 130,000 and 130,000 one is because they got a yelling Trump base. So people are clicking it. Right? Plus 54,000 plus 34,000 plus 34,000 plus 94,000, 94,000 plus 33,000 plus 31,000 equals that divided by nine. Right? One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine divided by nine. 56,000 views average. Okay. Okay. So what have we learned today? We have learned that the young Turks is pure garbage. Do you do Twitch as part? I do it. I do it. Yeah, no, I do. Sometimes I go crazy. There's been times I've done like 20 live streams in a month. Right? Like multiple tons of like 20, even more than 20. Sometimes I do 12 days in a row. Right? Probability distribution. Awesome nickname, by the way. Oh no, that's Rx that said that. Propaganda man. Propaganda man. So check this out. Young Turks pure garbage. 6.35 times more subscribers than Jimmy Dory. Right? According to SensorTube's data. Right? If this was fact, people were watching their crap. Jimmy Dory's average views from videos he put out a day ago is 70,000. Right? 70 times six. Young Turks should have been getting 420,000 views on the videos they put out. How much are they putting? How much are they getting views? 56,000 views. While they have over six times more subscribers than Jimmy Dory and 420. I know they should have got more. They don't get 420, half them. Right? They don't deserve 420. They don't understand 420. That's why they're such crap. Right? That's why they're such crap. Everything leads to 420. Doesn't it? 420 is the truth. Right? If no one, if the people don't hit 420, you know they're full of BS. Right? So they got six times more subscribers. They're getting less views on their videos than Jimmy Dory. I'm not even going to bother with democracy now. That's just a joke. That's just a joke. Let's do it out of, just because. Hey, where's the click on their YouTube? Here's, I'll just read out the numbers to you guys for democracy now. The videos they put out a day ago. Let's see. Day ago, day ago, day ago. Oh my God. Disaster, disaster. Here's democracy now's views. 11,000, 7.7,000, 17,000, 11,000. Oh, what have we got? 63,000. And that's it. 11,000. Let's do democracy now. 11,000, 11 plus, what is it? 11 plus, 7.7, 7.7 plus, 17 plus, 11 plus, 63 equals, divided by five, five videos. Democracy now is 22,000 views. And they got, they get three times more subscribers on a daily basis than Jimmy Dory. Right? They have more total subscribers than Jimmy Dory. Jimmy Dory is blowing democracy now and the young Turks out of the water. Right? If this was, this was on the stock market, right? And these were competing companies. Right? You put all your money, you go all in, Jimmy Dory. You would be shortened to crap out of democracy now in the young Turks. Right? Because they're garbage. They're collapsing. Okay. That's the beauty of ratios. It tells you everything you need to know about any system and you can fact check and even with the skewed numbers that SensorTube puts out, even with SensorTube unsubscribing independent creators because Jimmy Dory is independent. They are not. They take money from centralized power to put out propaganda. Right? Jimmy Dory, one man show with his couple of assistants, couple of people that he works with, putting stuff out. Right? Very important. With this, you can figure out who's telling the truth and who's not, who's got reliable, reliable information and who doesn't. Right? Fantastic. I really wanted to share this and I hadn't dug down the data. I just put the pages up. Right? I just put the pages up. Super cool. Super cool. Super cool. Full 420 pops up. Right? 420 is everywhere. Right? Bias algorithm on SensorTube, though the math of three channels information. Yeah. And this is going through social blade, by the way. And the view counts, we're looking, the view counts we're looking on SensorTube and that's, we know they're faking like, they're promoting authoritative figures. They're kicking up their views and independent creators, they're kicking down their views. That's what we see on mine, anyway. Okay. Psy night for dinner. How are you doing? Sly. Aren't you making an assumption about how the daily sub counts should correlate with daily views? Yeah, for sure. We're making a whole bunch of assumptions here, but, but the total sub counts are pretty, pretty important. Right? Jimmy Dory has the least number of subs. Right? Least number of subs. He's getting way more views on his videos according to the skewed data than democracy now or the young Turks. Right? And to take the data with a grain of salt, but I can honestly tell you, from someone that watched years ago, watched a couple of videos from the young Turks, I realized they were just pure propaganda, just garbage. I couldn't believe people were watching some of that crap. Right? Now they know most people know that they're just pure propaganda and democracy now used to watch abadly, almost every show they put out, but then they wanted to rush a gate and trump the arrangement syndrome and start spewing garbage. And it was just like horrendous to watch. It was watching like a friend turn into an addict and just ruin their lives. It was just depressing. Wish I could go back in time and go to the zoo and throw the guy in the grill and come up. Heisenberg, how are you doing? Hi, I am arrived now. What is this about? This is about looking at the info based on three different channels on censored to just looking at ratios. Oh, the first YouTube video ever. That guy, I don't, yeah, maybe. No, no, that guy was a legit guy. I don't think it is important. There are lots of channels with a lot of subs that don't have a large viewership. Ray Williams-Johnson is a good, I don't know Ray Williams-Johnson. Dumb viewers equals more subs, but they definitely mess with numbers. Both users and platforms, indeed, I would agree. It shows that young tourists and democracy now are declining, but it doesn't mean YouTube is fixing. I'm not assuming that YouTube is fixing numbers. I can honestly tell you that for my channel on censored tube, there's shenanigans going on. There's no doubt. There's no doubt, especially on certain types of videos we've put out. It's crazy, right? Dr. Hang, is it okay to say that young tourists get less subs per view video, but put out almost twice the amount of videos than Jimi Dory? Possibly, possibly, but it wouldn't account for the huge discrepancy. I don't think it counts for the huge discrepancy. This is, they're not putting out six times more videos than Jimi Dory, right? Jimi Dory put out four videos in one day. Young Turks put out nine videos, right? Double it. So they put out twice as many videos as Jimi Dory, but they got six times more subscribers. Why are they getting way less views than Jimi Dory? The discrepancy doesn't count. My guess is a lot of people have stopped watching the young Turks, right? That's, that's my takeaway from this, right? Oh, the Zoo guy is one of the censored tube's owners? No. Are you serious? I didn't know that, Allah, God. So I'm going to read your comment again, Dr. Hang, because it's good to go through the interpretation of this. Yeah. Is it okay to say that young Turks gets less subs per video, but put out almost twice the amount of videos than, yeah. But again, yeah, you're right. It makes sense to interpret it in the way I'm doing it. That's the interpretation I get from this, right? And I love looking at data, trying to figure out if there is a way that you can justify or you could figure out why the data is presenting itself in a certain light, right? Or maybe they're advertising their YouTube on their TV. So people are subbing from there, but aren't watching. For sure. There's people that are subbed on the young Turks, right? They might come across one video, they go sub, and then they watch another video to go, oh, this is pure garbage. I'm not going to watch anymore, but they forget to unsub, right? That could be one. But as an independent creator, I can tell you this. For the last few months, okay, we're flatlining, right? We don't get subscriber growth. Certain months, we're getting negatives. And then I release stuff that I know SensorTube doesn't demote, and then the subscribers go up. So all I'm doing right now with my channel, we've got 33,000 subscribers. I'm playing the 33,000 game. So when I go below 33,000, getting close to 32,000, I start releasing videos that I know SensorTube likes. It's not sensitive topics. And then the subscriber count goes above, and when I go above 33,000, I lay it in hard. Subscribers drop, subscribers drop. Freaking out of you. YouTube doesn't know what to do. When you're uploading the video, it does checking for like a whole day, and then you're going to upload it again. And it's freaking out. Like the YouTube automated algorithm, SensorTube automated algorithm starts freaking out. I'm personally laughing my ass off on that front. And then we just play the 33,000 game. It is what it is. And I know Jimmy Dory's talked about it. It's exactly the same thing that's happening to him. And it's exactly the same thing that has been happening to a lot of other independent content creators that I follow. That's why any independent content creator that's uploading their content on any other platform, I watched them on the other platforms. Correlation versus causation. Correlation does not equal. Correlation does not equal correlation. Oh my God. On a good note, I'm getting a lot of Chicho recommended videos of late. All mathematics. Ah, nice. Awesome. Awesome. Oh my God. Me at the zoo. Is this the first video that was uploaded to YouTube? It was uploaded in April 23rd, 2005 by the site co-founder. It was a site co-founder. I didn't know that. We uploaded the video on a channel with the username. Yeah. And that channel has like a million subscribers or something like that. And gang, don't forget Free Assange, Free Assange, Free Assange. Julien Assange is a publisher and journalist that has been crucified for trying to bring transparency and accountability of capitalist power to humanity. For more information, see Wikileaks.org, Defend.Wikileaks.org, or our Julien Assange and Wikileaks playlist. And stop watching this crap and that crap and start watching Jimmy Dory. I just wanted to do that, right? I just wanted to do that. Oh, we're already over two hours. We're already two times up. Gang, functions. I don't know who was here that wanted to talk about functions. I got a lot of, if you do Chicho, C-H-Y-C-H-O, and functions on DuckDuckGo, you should get the videos that have put out on functions. Okay. Gang, aside from that, thank you for being here. Thank you for the questions regarding the line and the parabola and the shortest distance and the riddle, Dr. Hanged. That was fantastic. That felt like a propaganda piece, but I appreciate the effort. I know it was possibly a propaganda piece, but man, any opportunity to trash talk propaganda and recommend independent content creators. Okay. Cool channel. I enjoyed. Awesome. Probably the distribution. I'm glad you enjoyed. And we have done math, probability mathematics as well. Gang, aside from that, if you want to know what this work is about, I am on Patreon. Patreon.com forward slash Chicho, C-H-Y-C-H-O. If you want to follow this work, which is basically layered on mathematics, follow the work on Patreon. I don't put anything behind paywall. Everything's creative, common, share, and share alike. Okay. For those of you who've been supporting this work on Patreon, Gang, thank you very much for the support. You do great work here, lad. Well done. Fest on all. Joy, thank you very much. Gang, we are live streaming on Twitch, twitch.tv forward slash Chicho live, C-H-Y-C-H-O-L-I-V-E. If you want to participate in the chat chat, Twitch is where you want to be at. And Gang, I saw a lot of follows come up and stuff like this. Thank you for the follows. Thank you for the support. Thank you for being here. It is in large part because of the support we're getting here and on Patreon that we're able to do this. And Mod Elder God, thank you for being here and taking care of business and having our backs. I do announce these live streams 30 minutes before we go live on Minds, BK, Gav, and Parler. You can follow the work there. We do share some additional content there, but Patreon is probably the best way to do it. And you can come to our Twitch channel anytime you want, live streaming or not, type in exclamation mark social, and all those links will pop up, including our Discord page at the bottom here, where there's people that have joined our channel, our server there, and are sharing a fair bit of information. Okay, you're definitely welcome to join us there. I do upload the audio for live streams where we don't have any visuals onto SoundCloud as a podcast. And if you want to consume this information as a podcast, those podcasts should be available to you on your favorite podcasting platform, including Spotify and iTunes. Okay. And we will be uploading this last stream to SensorTube, to Bitube, to Rumble, and to Odyssey. And I'll probably go through and take out the segments where we did, specifically the mathematics, especially the line, the parabola, that was fantastic. And most likely this one regarding Jimmy Dore, pull those out as individual segments and upload those to all these four platforms. And for those of you that are supporting this work on these video sharing platforms, thank you very much for the support. And for those of you who are supporting this work by joining SensorTube membership, YouTube membership, thank you very much for the support gang. Aside from that, thank you for being here, gang. I'll announce the next set of streams, probably the next couple of days, once we get our schedule sorted out here. Okay. Aside from that, I hope you guys are having a fantastic day, and I hope you have a fantastic weekend. Bye, everyone.