problem with infinite series equalling -1/12 ?

Originally posted by humy
And what is so terrible about YouTube videos and Wikipedia anyway?

The YouTube video that Duchess64 refused to watch was created by university lecturer's from around the world including professors from some of the worlds best universities.

http://www.numberphile.com/MSRI/index.html

http://www.numberphile.com/team/index.html

The post that was quoted here has been removed

why do you assume we are incapable of distinguishing videos that obviously contain rubbish from those that don't?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

In an earlier post, I already have explained that YouTube videos, in particular,
seem extremely variable in quality

Well dirr. You think we didn't already know this?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

"Just explain to us why it impossible for a YouTube video to be made to
teach laypeople about a science subject...."
--Humy

that isn't quite what I meant because my complete statement was:

“Just explain to us why it is impossible for a YouTube video to be made to teach laypeople about a science subject (introductory course ) AND be entirely factually correct AND be perfectly effective at educating laypeople that have a genuine interest in the subject AND be made by a fully qualified professor/professors/scientist that knows exactly what he is talk about” (my added emphases )

But, that said, I now apologize to you for incorrectly assuming you were implying this was impossible 🙂

The post that was quoted here has been removed

It was an attack on your opinions not on you personally.

Now, as he has done before, Twhitehead misrepresents my position and and prefers to attack a 'strawman'.
If I misrepresented you then I apologize. I realize that it is not always easy to fully understand someones position from a short post. In fact, even after your very lengthy post, your position is still far from clear.
So I will not talk about your position, but rather state my own:
YouTube is unlike Wikipedia in that the individual authors are easier to identify, and it is categorized into channels. As such you cannot really make a judgment about YouTube as a whole as one might do with Wikipedia. Any judgments on YouTube should be made on a channel or author basis not because something is or isn't on YouTube.
It is true that an unguided student should be discerning about what material he seeks, but the same applies equally to books as it does to YouTube videos.

There is plenty of excellent material on YouTube by very reputable people or institutions and it can be used as an aid in learning Mathematics as well as a wide range of other subjects.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Yes, I did state as such. But now you have clarified, I think I understand your opinion a bit better. Either that or you have extreme difficulty expressing opinions in English.

But there's even less (none) editorial oversight over YouTube videos than
Wikipedia articles.
On that you are wrong. As I already pointed out, a sweeping statement about YouTube videos in general is meaningless and unjustified. Its like saying 'there is no editorial oversight on books'. Which books? Which YouTube video?
Some YouTube videos are produced by universities with plenty of editorial oversight.

Often on any very challenging subject, an ordinary person would find it difficult, if not impossible, to separate what's good from what's well-meaning but seriously flawed from what's deceiving or rubbish.
I disagree. I think the vast majority of ordinary people are quite capable of discerning good quality sources. But if you are correct, then there is no hope for the ordinary person - and they shouldn't take your word for it either as they are terrible judges of character and you could well be a complete charlatan.

If one has a choice (and I know that not everyone realistically does), then it's better to learn advanced mathematics from a well-qualified teacher using approved textbooks than from a YouTube video of uncertain quality.
How is the ordinary person to judge what is a 'well-qualified teacher'? Surely teachers have no oversight too?

It's much easier for someone to produce a YouTube video with nonsense than to have a major publisher print a textbook with that nonsense in it.
Now you are cheating. You aren't allowed to prescribe 'text books', you can only say 'books'. Are you saying that there are no books out there with absolute nonsense in them? Do you honestly think RJ would fail to find one or two?
Books too, have no editorial oversight. And if you are correct about the stupidity of the ordinary person then they would be incapable of knowing what is what's good from what's well-meaning but seriously flawed from what's deceiving or rubbish.

I don't think you have yet realized that YouTube now produces more content than all the worlds TV stations put together.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Get over yourself.