Complaining that numberphile is popsci shit

>Complaining that numberphile is popsci shit
>Not a single person on Veeky Forums will ever have a higher h-index and number of citations than one of them
scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=f-hzOcwAAAAJ&hl=en
What now? Do you admit that numberphile is the real deal?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTBqohhFNBE_09L0i-lf3fYXF5woAbrzJ
youtube.com/watch?v=-k3mVnRlQLU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I like popsci, it gives me something to talk about with brainlets.

Matt Parker is the only cool numberphile guy, the rest aren't even cool.

What, you don't think Hannah Fry and her book The Maths of Love are cool?

Can math be popsci? I thought the whole idea of popsci was that its the boiled down fragrance of scientific ideas. How do you popsci math?

You popsci math by spreading shit like this:
Fibonacci numbers: 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144
1/89 = 0.0112359
1/9899 = 0.000101020305081321345590
1/998999 = 0.000001001002003005008013021034055089144
As you keep adding 9 before and after the original "89" in the denominator, the fraction will have more and more Fibonacci's numbers.
There is a theoretical fact behind this but most people who are not in math would only "wow" for the cool factor.
tl;dr you popsci math by spreading cool, surface factors to delude people thinking that Math is all of "wow".

Parker is a scrub, Tadashi Tokieda is the real deal.

Who said anything about not liking the professors who talk on Numberphile? These people are still researchers, but the program remains popsci shit.

I like numberphile, though I'm a business major. I just an interest in mathematics, and it helpa me discover new things. Fight me faggots.

>business major
get the fuck out of here