
3Blue1Brown and the Beauty of Mathematics [video] - oska
https://lexfridman.com/grant-sanderson/
======
vermilingua
Worth looking at Grant's graphics library made for and used in his videos:
[https://github.com/3b1b/manim/](https://github.com/3b1b/manim/)

------
soniman
If Grant is not on NPR or PBS within five years I would be very surprised. He
has a very distinctive voice. I find it kind of annoying but it's one of those
voices that as soon as you hear it you know who it is.

~~~
psv1
> If Grant is not on NPR or PBS within five years I would be very surprised.

Do you mean as an appearance or with his own programme?

~~~
soniman
He's the next Robert Krulwich!

------
Thorrez
> Playback on other websites has been disabled by the video owner.

Seems like a misconfiguration for Lex to embed his videos in his site then
disable embedding.

------
LukaszWiktor
\- Why is the nature of reality so compressible into clean beautiful equations
that are for the most part simple?

\- The only things that physicists are interested in are the ones that are
simple enough they could describe it mathematically but as soon as it's
sufficiently complex system that's outside the realm of physics, that's
biology or whatever have you...

So true!

------
outlace
While Lex gets interesting people on his podcast, he seems to focus so much on
"beauty" in his interviews that nothing substantive ever gets said. He's
constantly asking "what do you find to be the most beautiful about X?" and
asking other highly speculative and un-substantive questions. I wish he would
ask questions aimed and allowing the interviewer to spend the most time
delivering high yield information. This is meant as constructive feedback not
as mere complaining.

~~~
dogdawg
If a man is concerned with abstract ideas then perhaps that's all he
contributes to the world. Some people want to see things a certain way and
will sacrifice their lives for seeing it that way, that's the beauty of life,
people are free to choose the good, the beautiful, and the true or any
combination of each which is their own beauty, truth, or good in whatever
order they choose it. No one can step in are correct them if they think they
are wrong, it's not their right. It's the right of people to choose to live a
certain way and to experience the world in whichever way it's handed to them
with whatever premises that they have in their minds.

Take for instance a starving artist. In art it's in fact the case this this is
common:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starving_artist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starving_artist)

Some artists due to their state may for instance cut off their ears like Pablo
Picasso. This is a common co-occurrence with art. Society has done nothing to
alleviate this problem in that other than a few recognized artists, the large
morass go completely unsupported and fall into obscurity. In fact when society
tries to rehabilitate such artists they attempt to do some by giving them
remedial jobs that do not do justice to their perspective or talent, but such
is the fate of the artist in that either they get market recognition or they
fall into their own obscurity and may not even be known in their lifetimes.

~~~
dbtx
(van Gogh)

~~~
krick
This is a funny mistake, since Picasso is a contradictory example: he was
immensely successful during his lifetime.

~~~
hoseja
Another relevant thing I learned about recently is that Dali was apparently
considered massive sellout by his peers and seems to have gotten so famous
thanks to a strategic move to America.

------
jhanschoo
I've got to shake my head at these segments where the interviewer asks a
philosophical question without seeming to have the conceptual maturity and
framing to reliably go beyond delineating semantics. Luckily, Sanderson goes
above and beyond.

10:31 – Is math discovered or invented?

The way it was posed sounds like it was asking for a dogmatic judgment on the
nature of doing math, but I like Sanderson's take on how it looks to him, that
certain mathematical problems seem discovered, and the mathematical tools
developed to solve them and the frameworks they become seem invented.

14:30 – Difference between physics and math

Rather than tackling the philosophical question directly, Sanderson talks
about the motivations mathematicians and physicists have when they do math /
do physics, and that different people will give different answers.

17:24 – Why is reality compressible into simple equations?

Again, Sanderson provides a saner view: this feeling comes from that once you
analyze out all your irrelevant details that you don't care about, or that you
give up about (chaotic systems), what's left is what you can focus on by
describing in simple equations.

~~~
jasim
"Is math discovered or invented?" is a question that underlies a lot of math
philosophy writings I've read (of the popular science variety) and so I could
immediately understand where Lex was going with it. It is a simple question
which can elicit as much depth one is willing to dive into.

Similarly I thought all of Lex's questions came from deep understanding of
what he was asking, and he would've known clearly what Sanderson would've
replied (minus his personal insights) and what other competing answers are out
there.

I love Lex Friedman's interviews - he simply asks a small but fertile question
and then lets the guest talk.

~~~
mistermann
Me too, I really enjoy the perspective he takes, quite unique, but not to
everyone's liking.

------
quindecagon
According to the provided by the UN, genocide requires acting with intent to
destroy.

> ... committed with intent to destroy ...

[https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml)

