Part 2: A Math Teacher's Commentary on Terrence Howard's Oxford Address

~~ Please Like & Subscribe if you enjoyed this video!! It really helps to support this small channel!! ~~ 20:01 I have a fairly good explanation for how to explain his misconception about dimes, dollars, cents, etc.... - In his book, he argues "what's a dime times a dime? We know it's a dollar, but the calculator says it's a cent! Why is that?" - So... first of all, we need to get our units straight. When we say "dime", we are referring to 0.10 dollars (1 tenth of a dollar). When we say "cent", we are referring to 0.01 (one hundredth of a dollar). So, multiply: 0.10 * 0.10 = 0.01. In other words, one tenth of one tenth is equal to one hundredth (0.01). It's a tenth of a tenth. But a tenth of what? A dollar? So what happened there? We forgot about our units!!! Multiplying a dollar (or a fraction of a dollar) by another dollar (or fraction of a dollar) DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!!! What results is a numerical answer expressed in SQUARE DOLLARS! Which is a unit of AREA, a 2-dimensional unit, rather than "dollar" which is a 1-dimensional unit. Correcting for dimension: Since we know that 100 cents = 1 dollar, then we know that (100)^2 square cents = 1 square dollar. A square dollar is equal to 10,000 square cents. Thus, we could say that "a dime times a dime" is actually 0.01 square dollars = A hundredth of a square dollar, meaning a hundredth of 10,000 square cents, which is 100 square cents, which is 0.01 square dollars. The calculator is not saying it's a "cent". A "cent" is a hundredth of a dollar. The calculator is correctly saying that the result is equal to 0.01 square dollars. QED

I think if he proved anything it is that acting is not hard and that even schizophrenics can do it.

one of the most intense feelings of second hand embarrassment for someone. imagine having the arrogance to think that you can casually point out fundamental problems with all of mathematics and physics, as if there aren't some of the greatest minds in history supporting it. so incredibly insanely stupid.

Math hurt this man at some point. That's the only explanation I can come up with for him butchering it like this. It's revenge, long overdue. For me it was calculus that did it. Broke me. I just gave up on it and left it to those better suited to it. But it was multiplication that broke Terry Boy. And that childhood trauma has left indelible wounds on his psyche that he will never forgive! Pray for him. Beseech the great Wave Conjugations to intervene on his behalf! 😔

I think this is the perfect example of the Dunning Kruger effect.

1 unit * 1 unit = 1 square unit (units^2). We can represent area, or volume, of anything originally expressed in units of length (such as centimeters), by using what are called square units (such as square centimeters), and cubic units (cubic centimeters, also called "cc" in the medical field). 1 centimeter * 1 centimeter * 1 centimeter = 1 cubic centimeter. If you say it = 3 cc's, and you put 3 cc's into someone's I.V line, YOU WILL KILL THEM!!! Length * length = area. length * length * length = volume. But 1 unit of area, in the 2nd dimension, IS NOT 2 units of area!! It's 1 unit, in 1 dimension higher than the previous. But it still represents unity, as defined in that respective dimension. Noting the dimensionality of units, and properly implementing dimensional analysis, may help avoid ALL THESE confusions, regarding 1 * 1 = 1

3:44 I like how the student interviewing him almost accidentally says "circle of life", rather than "flower of life" (probably because it's made up of a bunch of circles)...can't tell if he's tongue-in-cheek mocking him right to his face, since the "flower of life" is not important at all to modern mathematics, much less physics. Indeed,, "the flower of life" and all that "sacred geometry" stuff is like the math equivalent of pseudoscience - "numerology", you could call it, but I think there's a more formal definition for that term (which if I'm not mistaken, began with the ancient Pythagoreans)

Listening to this is a lot like listening to people “explain” flat earth. Same type of idiotic delusions based on completely misunderstanding fundamental concepts.

I've never heard this talk, and it is like....WTF????? He even brought up Jim Crow laws? Racial segregation...in math? How crazy is this man, exactly? 😳

He got that completely wrong. What he meant was something like 6cm per year. And that also has absolutely nothing to do with anything he's trying to say. It's also not the same rate that everything else is moving away, as he claims. So much BS!! 🙄 Balanced equation?!! I think one equals one is a pretty balanced equation. 😆 I literally cannot stop laughing, but I'm also in a state of horror. 😆

Watching this I felt like Kanye west in that Kobe Commercial….WTF DOES THAT MEAN TERRENCE HOWARD!!!

thanks for making this video. the only thing I would add to this is that I wouldn't be too sure on the motives or opinions of the Oxford host. We don't know if he truly was convinced by something or is maybe confused himself or even if he is believing or mocking Howard. Other than that, thank you sooo much for pointing out the mathematical mistakes he makes, would be great to hear from a physicist too.

Newton pretty much invented calculus. I don't think he would be confused by the simple multiplication table. 😆 Oh yeah, and here's the other one. An action times an action. Numbers are not actions!! What in the hell is he talking about?! 😆 Everyone in that room is feeling so awkward, being trapped in there having to listen to this. They didn't know what they were getting into! 😆

Wait, HE put the flower of life in a 3D shape? So wtf is underneath the foo dog's foot? The guy with the glasses can't even repeat the shit that Terrence told him at lunch. If I slap you 1 time. How many times did I slap you? Math and physics together proving him wrong.

Did they not call everyone with ideas, such as flying, space, science, and mathematics when it was a new thing crazy? Everyone in history was called crazy until they couldn't be disproven. Did prove he is wrong?. And I agree the fact that YOU are so confident doesn't mean what you say is correct. What you are doing is making fun of him, down-talking him, judging his facial expressions etc.

I have already watched these and found this commentary and love every minute of it. I love these Oxford guys that brought him in to troll. Thats pretty funny

I’m incredibly grateful you made these videos.

I'm absolutely convinced that 99% the commenters here and on the original video, who come out in support of TH and talk about how brilliant he is, are either paid shills of TH or TH, himself. I'm completely serious. There just can't be this many people who listen to him talk and come to the conclusion that he is making any sense whatsoever with this gibberish. And the nonsensical, rambling language these people use is practically right out his mouth. I realize that these types of people exist, but it just seems absurd to think they'd all know about TH's views and feel passionate enough about it to take the time to come to all these videos and defend him in the comment sections, lol. It just has to be a paid PR campaign.

Serious question: has anyone been able to figure out his metaphor comparing the Identity Element Property to the Jim Crow Laws of the 1960's? That still doesn't make sense to me. Also, why would he make a metaphor like that to a crowd at a British University? I'm sure they're somewhat familiar with American History, but I'm not sure they would all immediately know what he's referring to. I'm sure they're more familiar with the history of England / The UK, or whatever country they are from, if they are an international student, or studying abroad. How many Americans can easily cite what social conflicts were occurring in England in the 1960's? Or another major country? It's a bit of an ethnocentric example he made, in my opinion.

I'm just dying to see his 10x10 times table.