trash accent
Many thanks for the sharing
great content - excellent introduction to the method.
Very good explanation on TRIZ! thank you very much.
how to memorize these 39 system parameters?
Hello, any idea where can I find open-sources that have TRIZ examples and exercises for practice?
Thanks.
Very useful and thorough explanation.
great speech sir
Its a really interesting and important presentation. Thank you for sharing this presentation online. Can you please send me to my email ID rajesh220677@gmail.com if possible.
Excellent presentation. Such clarity. Thanks a lot.
Thank you for Sharing!
Hi. How can i solve these TRIZ problems?
https://i.hizliresim.com/pG7BDn.png
Here set out summary, the work, which has the name: How computer can independently invent (i.e. Methods of invention by means of which, three programmers can easily, write programs by means of which the computer can independently invent many inventions)
Suppose that in computer memory are written these two conditional propositions (and, more recorded other contingent judgments):
1) if : flame will be to place under a stone, then (i.e. in this case): the stone will be heated.
2) if : the stone will be heated, then (i.e. in this case): the stone will be expand.
The words of the conditional proposition which are arranged from (i.e. after) the word "if", to (i.e. prior to) the words "then (i.e. in this case)" are called the basis of the conditional proposition, and the words of the conditional proposition which are arranged after the words "then (i.e. in this case)" are called consequence of the conditional proposition.
Suppose that the computer must solve the following inventive, task, that is, the computer must determine what needs to be done in order for get the following: the stone will be expand (that is, the computer must determine how one can get the following: the stone will be expand), let us call this task initial inventive, task (suppose, that this task has not been solved yet). From the second conditional proposition it follows that in order to, computer decided initial inventive, task, it is necessary that he solved the following inventive, task, that is, it is necessary that for the computer to determine what needs to be done in order to was the following: the stone will be heated (that is, it is necessary for the computer to determine how it is possible to get the following: the stone will be heated) let us call this task the second inventive, task. From the first conditional proposition it follows that in order to, computer decided the second inventive, task, it is necessary that he solved the following inventive, task, that is, it is necessary that for the computer to determine what needs to be done in order to was the following: flame will be to place under a stone (let us call this task the third inventive task). The third inventive, task is solved because it is known how to get the following: flame will be to place under a stone. If the third inventive, task solved, then (i.e. in this case) therefore solved the second inventive, task. If solved the second inventive, task, then (i.e. in this case) therefore solved initial inventive, task.
Rule: Let us take one, any inventive, task (let us call this task fourth inventive, task). In order for the computer has created an inventive, task (which has the following peculiarity if the computer solved this task, then he thereby solved the fourth inventive task) necessary that computer finds in his memory such a conditional proposition, which has the following peculiarity: the consequence of this conditional proposition and the description of this fourth inventive, task consist of same words that are in same sequence. And the basis of this conditional proposition will be an inventive, task which has the following peculiarity if the computer solved this task, then (i.e. in this case) he thereby solved the fourth inventive task.
A computer can find same words in its memory. Let us take one, any inventive, task (let us call this task fifth inventive, task). The computer solved the fifth inventive task if he will make the following: at first, with the help of this rule, will create such an inventive task (let us call this task sixth inventive, task) which has the following peculiarity if the computer solved this task, then he thereby solved the fifth inventive task, then (i.e. after this) the computer with the help of this rule will create such an inventive, task (which has the following peculiarity if the computer solved this task, then he thereby solved the sixth inventive, task) and so on (an average of 750 times) until the moment in which (that is, until when) the computer will create such an inventive, task whose solution is known, and if the computer creates such (that is, the last) inventive, task, then therefore the computer solved the fifth inventive, task. That is, the computer will solve the fifth (that is, any) inventive task if it creates in this way an average of 750 such tasks.
Almost all currently known information (which are needed to create inventions) can be stated in the form of conditional judgments. I believe that a computer can invent through this method almost all inventions that people can invent without experiments. If, for example, 2000 random conditional judgments are recorded in the memory of the computer, then from these judgments the computer can create on the average not a little quantity inventions through means of this method.
Cheap short living objects are called "active armor". When misslie approaches a tank the armor shoots cheap metal debries to destroy the missile
This talk is a copy of my teaching material for the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and is pure plagerism
this video is awesome! thank you very much for putting this together
Very useful , finally i got it
Very well explained.
thanks! this has been very helpful
i like this video very much ....thank you so much . can i have your email for further descusion on this topic .
can i have this presentation i want to teach my class in same way u did.
thanking you
You are kidding. Speed reading in mathematics? You can take a Evelyn Speed Reading course for mathematics? My friend, it does not exist, not even an IQ above 200 like Terry Tao. You can spend an evening on a page; you can spend a month on a page; you can spend a life time on one page. Who is kidding whom? The entire humanity does not suffice to scratch the surface of maths. That is the nature of the beast. An example would be Navier-Stoke PDE: a Millennium problem. Speed reading without doing the exercises makes you shallow. Most mathematicians understand a part of a field and have a hard time crossing fields. If you want a book on calculus done right, I recommend an old book by Warner, Foundation to Differential Manifolds and Lie Group. The part on sheaves however is not modern. You can have examples of various cohomology theories and how they are related to differential forms. Learning that from Spanier would be impossible. I regret I did not do the exercises when I was a grad student. I wish I had been taught that kind of stuff as an undergrad. It gives plenty concrete examples to a very abstract subject and makes algebraic topology palatable. I just spent two months doing most of the exercises 2020 for entertainment. Just try the Hodge Identity exercise.
Can you speak in Chinese? Wow..
The question with the room made me think about the Herfindahl-Hirschmann that measures market concentration.
you know, his chinese is actually really good, he has the tones correct and everything
As for the continuity example. I think the most discrete answer would be a function is continuous at a given input when both of its limits exist and are equal or converge to the same value. Take sin(t) for example, no matter what input you use within this function both the left and right hand limits exist and are equal. Now, take the tangent function and examine its left and right hand limits at tan(PI/2) or tan(45) and other multiples of them. Both limits exist, yet they are not equal. The limit approach towards the right tends to +infinity and the limit approach towards the left tends to -infinity. Here we can see that the sine and cosine functions are both continuous where the tangent, cotangent, secant and cosecant are not continuous for all of their domains. The challenging thing here is that we are typically taught about continuity with respect to functions and graphs before we are ever introduced to the concepts of limits. Yet I think the best proof and representation of continuity lies within the properties of a functions limits across all of its domain.
I've always enjoyed math and physics. The one thing I have learned over time is that numbers, math and all that follows they are nothing more than a product of the mind as they are all conceptual ideas. At the end of the day, math is nothing more than a model and it is what you make of it! I enjoy hearing all different kinds of perspectives and approaches. 3Blue1Brown is one of my favorites along with Mathologer and a few others... I love their presentations and visualization methods. It's almost like comparing or listening to a monotone college professor who'd soon enough put you to sleep on trying to explain the phenomenons of the Mandelbrot Set as opposed to writing a simple computer program to graph it visually being able to see and interact with the infinite patterns and levels of details that a simple equation produces. Grant and others like him allow mathematics to be fun and engaging instead of being monotonous, drab and dreary... Keep up the great work!
Video on Markov chain and/or Monte Carlo
I think I have a problem. I dig all the axioms and definitions when I start reading about a branch of mathematics but I don't really like the how all this is usefull part that comes after.
grant probably finishes his syllabus before his teacher do!!
I’m Chinese I’m Taiwanese too
So this is what Conan O'Brien does in his free time
我真的沒想到你是中文講者，哇！
I'm not sure Grant would read this, but anyway I want to ask a question:
After I've heard that the proof that proves the statement and the proof that tells you what makes it true are different each other, I realized that I sometimes meet the former proof, bang my head on my textbook, and wish the latter had been written on it. But occasionally I meet proofs I cannot categorize into either the former or the latter. Those proofs seem to give you what makes the statement true, but also they seem not to give you a room to allow deep understanding. I think that could be problematic, because those proofs could make you fall into illusion that you understand it while you actually don't.
I want some advices to identify whether I understand what the statement means or is it just illusory.
P.S. In case you don't understand what former and latter proof means, here is an example from physics. You can prove Newton's gravity equation(I don't how it is expressed in English exactly) is true(ish, as Einstein's theory led to revision of it) by observation, but still you don't know why it works that way. The observation is the former, which only shows whether it is true or not, while understanding of why it works the way it is is the latter.
Man you should do a studio ghibli movie review 😍
Dude, you're a legend. Thank you for the hard work you put into your videos to make things clearer. Seriously, thank you!!
Grant, do you think you'd ever create a Discord for all your fans and followers and math/science lovers to gather and chat? I'd love to have a place to hang out, chat and talk learning, school, university, classes, textbook recs etc...
12:12 Have you seen _Cryptological Mathematics_ by Robert Edward Lewand? He has a few characters in the book that react and "interact" with the information.
im waiting for your own book
Grant giving a student friendly perspective on Mathematics, is probably on of the best things on YouTube. What I am missing in the book recommendations list is a discrete mathematics book, is there any good textbook about the subject for autodidacts?
2:09 actually during my third year in university I had a course which was dedicated only to proofs from this book.
Thank you prof. Yuval roichman!
Keep it up 👍👍
Great information...
Very nice
Amazing session sir ! Thank you for such sessions !
what is the difference between typical problem solving and TRIZ way of problem solving?
Here is a summary of the work that has the title: How a computer can invent by itself (i.e. the Methods for developing inventions with the help of which three programmers can easily create a program using which a computer can invent many inventions by itself)
Let’s suppose that two such conditional propositions are written to the computer memory (and also other conditional propositions are written):
1) If: fire is placed under the stone, then: the stone will heat up.
2) If: the stone will heat up, then: the stone will expand.
Words of conditional proposition which stand from (i.e. after) the word «if» and before the word «then» are called the basis of conditional proposition, and words of conditional proposition that stand after the word «then» are called the consequence of conditional proposition.
Let’s suppose that computer should solve the following inventive task, i.e. the computer has to determine what needs to be done to have the following: the stone will expand (i.e. the computer has to determine how the following can be obtained: the stone will expand), let’s call this task the original inventive task (let’s assume that this task has not been solved yet). From the second conditional proposition it follows that in order for the computer to solve the original inventive task it is necessary for the computer to solve the following inventive task, i.e. it is necessary for the computer to determine what needs to be done to obtain the following: the stone will heat up (i.e. it is necessary for the computer to determine how the following can be obtained: the stone will be heated); let’s call this task the second inventive task. And (from the first conditional proposition it follows that) in order for the computer to solve the second inventive task, it is necessary for it to solve the following inventive task, i.e. it is necessary for the computer to determine what needs to be done to have the following: fire will be placed under a stone (let's call this problem the third inventive task). ))And the third inventive task has been solved, because it is known how to get the following: fire will be placed under a stone. And if the third inventive task has been solved, then the second inventive task has been solved too. And if the second inventive task has been solved, then the original inventive task has been solved too.
The Rule: Let’s take any inventive task (let's call this inventive task the fourth inventive task). In order for a computer to create an inventive task, having solved which it thereby solved the fourth inventive task, it is necessary for the computer to find in its own memory such a conditional proposition that has the following feature: the consequence of this conditional proposition and description of this fourth inventive task have the same meanings or consist of the same words which are located in the same sequence. And the basis of this conditional proposition will be an inventive task, having solved which the computer thereby solves the fourth inventive task. They have the same meanings: a) the word and interpretation of this the word b) synonyms and so on.
Computer can find the same words in its memory. Let's take any inventive task (let's call this inventive task the fifth inventive task). The computer will solve the fifth inventive task if it does the following: first, using this rule, it will create such an inventive task (let’s call this task the sixth inventive task), having solved which it thereby solves the fifth inventive task, then, using this rule, the computer will create such an inventive task, having solved which it thereby solved the sixth inventive task, etc., (on average 90 times) to the moment at which (i.e. until) the computer creates such an inventive task the solution of which is known, and if the computer creates such (i.e. the latter) inventive task, then the computer will solve the fifth inventive task. That is, the computer will solved the fifth (i.e. any) inventive task if it creates on average 90 such tasks.
Almost all currently known information (which is needed to create inventions) can be expressed in the form of conditional propositions. If, for example, 400 random physical effects in the form of conditional propositions are stored in the computer memory, then the computer can create on average a lot of inventions using this method (an average inventor knows 150 physical effects).
How a computer can invent by itself
Hello. IBM and Softline companies help our company (which is called company a ton of gold) to implement the work called: How a computer can invent by itself (i.e. the Methods for developing inventions, with the help of which three programmers can easily create a program using which a computer can invent many inventions by itself). I believe that inventions that the computer will create using this program can be sold for hundreds of millions of dollars. I ask you to contribute to implementation (i.e. use) of this work, or I ask you to implement (i.e. use) this work. I am the author of this work. This work and my phone are set out on the website http://www.55255.ru/ I believe that with the help of this work of mine, two companies (independently of each other) created two programs, with the help of each of which the computer by itself can invent many inventions. As a result of this, the computer by itself created 40000 inventions. The addresses of the sites of these companies such http://www.method.ru/, https://www.truemachina.com/ But the creators of these programs apparently has not published information that they have used (I suppose) my abovementioned work to create these programs. So our company striving for creation for the third time with the help of this my work of the program using which a computer could independently invent many inventions. My e-mail 275527@gmail.com
The business plan: I am the Director of company «Tonna zolota». I will hire three programmers. And in one year they will easily create a program with the help of this work, by means of which a computer will be able to invent many inventions by itself. For the salary of programmers and other expenses $ 50000 will be necessary. 49% of profit on sale of inventions (and the other) will be yours, and 51% our company. To implement this plan it is necessary that you give our company $ 50000 or hire three programmers yourself.
Yours faithfully, Shmonov Aleksandr