Collatz Conjecture Walk-through
Audience:
Tags: collatzp-adicfractalchaospenrose-boundarycoordinate-inversion
Analytics
Comments
There are many, many videos and articles about Collatz. I enjoyed watching yours, but at several places I was confused by the notation or the general idea, and you used a lot of language near the middle to the end that would confuse an average viewer. I think it would have been better to start with the Collatz conjecture and then outline what the difference was going to be here and why you created this modified function. Also, I will note that your “x“‘s and your multiplication sign look quite similar and so it made those writing bits sometimes tricky to follow.
This is quite interesting. I liked the reformulation of the Collatz conjecture to just 1 rule. But everything that followed that did not make sense. Also, it would be good to make a disclaimer that this is not actually a proof of the Collatz Conjecture. I skimmed the paper you linked in the description and the proof assumes the naturals is finite IDK??? Nevertheless, I found the video entertaining, paced very well, and I will probably remember it for a long time.
This video does not prove the Collatz Conjecture.
I was already familiar with the Collatz Conjecture, but in order to properly judge the content of the video, I would have to delve deeper into the article you based your video on. Therefore, I would just make a suggestion about the style of the video. I think the music would serve a more meaningful purpose if you only used it during the introduction, since once you begin explaining the math it can be a little distracting. Also, it is perfectly fine to use handwritten explanations, but sometimes your hand prevented the audience from seeing the calculations you were doing. Maybe, you could solve this by editing the video and adding some transitions to make it smoother.
This is just a personal opinion, of course. I am looking forward to reading the article you attached and understanding better the idea you present in the video, since it seemed to me quite engaging.
This proof doesn’t hold for all numbers. There is no induction step. The music was nice though.