Feedback for my YouTube Videos on Real Analysis

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around feedback for a YouTube video on Real Analysis, specifically focusing on the Archimedean Property of Reals. Participants evaluate the clarity and presentation of the video, considering aspects of mathematical definitions and explanations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants noted that the presenter improved the pacing of the video, making it easier to understand.
  • Concerns were raised about the lack of definitions for terms such as "ordered" when discussing ordered fields.
  • Participants pointed out that the term "field" was not clearly defined in the context of the four arithmetic operations, emphasizing that in analysis, only addition and multiplication are considered binary operations.
  • One participant clarified that subtraction and division are derived operations and suggested that the presenter aimed to provide a quick recap rather than an exhaustive explanation.
  • Overall, some participants expressed enjoyment of the clarity and quality of the recent videos.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the video has improved in clarity, but there are differing views on the adequacy of definitions and explanations provided, particularly regarding mathematical terminology.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about prior knowledge may not be explicitly stated, and the discussion reflects varying levels of familiarity with the concepts presented in the video series.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in Real Analysis, video presentations of mathematical concepts, and those seeking feedback on educational content may find this discussion relevant.

caffeinemachine
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
799
Reaction score
15
Some time back I posted about my videos on Group Theory on YouTube and got valuable feedback from the PF community.

With the response in mind, I made substantial changes to my presentation.
One of the main complaints was that I was speaking too fast.

Here is my recent video on Real Analysis: Archimedean Property of Reals

The purpose of this post is to get some more feedback on the clarity of videos such as above.

Ultimately my goal is to host a huge array of high quality higher math courses on my channel.

Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Euge and haushofer
Physics news on Phys.org
caffeinemachine said:
One of the main complaints was that I was speaking too fast.
It appears that you took the complaint to heart -- this video was much easier to understand.

At the beginning of the video you were talking about ordered fields. You didn't define what you meant by "ordered". Also, when you talked about the term "field" you mentioned the four arithmetic operations. In analysis, the only binary operations are addition and multiplication. In the context of rings, integral domains, and fields (a field is an integral domain in which every element except the additive identity has a multiplicative inverse, which we can call z). Subtraction is defined as addition by the additive inverse (i.e., -x), and division is defined as multiplication by the multiplicative inverse (i.e., ##x^{-1}).
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Mark44 said:
It appears that you took the complaint to heart -- this video was much easier to understand.
Thank you for the encouragement.
Mark44 said:
At the beginning of the video you were talking about ordered fields. You didn't define what you meant by "ordered".
This is only one video in a series of videos. Ordered fields were discussed in detail in a previous one. The beginning was meant as a quick recap.
Mark44 said:
Also, when you talked about the term "field" you mentioned the four arithmetic operations. In analysis, the only binary operations are addition and multiplication. In the context of rings, integral domains, and fields (a field is an integral domain in which every element except the additive identity has a multiplicative inverse, which we can call z). Subtraction is defined as addition by the additive inverse (i.e., -x), and division is defined as multiplication by the multiplicative inverse (i.e., ##x^{-1}).
I agree that 'subtraction' and 'division' are derived operations. I meant to only quickly capture the main idea of a field. All the formal details were covered in a previous video.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Greg Bernhardt
Hi @caffeinemachine! It's been a while. I looked at some of your more recent videos, and overall I enjoyed their clarity and quality!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Greg Bernhardt
Euge said:
Hi @caffeinemachine! It's been a while. I looked at some of your more recent videos, and overall I enjoyed their clarity and quality!
Hey thanks so much man!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Greg Bernhardt

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K