this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
1238 points (98.6% liked)

memes

15547 readers
3359 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] swizzlestick@lemmy.zip 35 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] can@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 days ago

On the other hand, physicists like to say physics is to math as sex is to masturbation.

[–] blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There's a whole bit in The Incredibles about how math has changed since Bob was in school

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

That was probably inspired by the USA's crappy national curriculum system of forcing kids to learn and use the lattice method which is 100% some sort of scam to make it look like math illiterate children are passing class and failing upwards.

I mean seriously, we've been using base 10 arab system for a millenia, but you're trying to tell me the department of education came up with a better method of drawing a damn chi square matrix abomination that makes even the two millenia old roman numeral system look good in comparison.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 30 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I love that Eratosthenes was able to estimate the circumference of the earth with the amount of math we had in his era. Meanwhile, modern flat-earthers are still making me want to vomit.

I used to see fractals in the shadows on LSD. I couldn’t think of the word “fractal,” and told my friend, “You know, that thing in math?” And he said to me, “When you trip you see math?!” Fun times. To be a teen again.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

The really funny part is the other two are also just math.

The fabric of reality is woven from math, and that's beautiful.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I've got a pet theory that a hypothetical alien species' music would be more recognizably similar to humans' than their biology would.

[–] bootloop@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

This could make the plot of a great sci-fi book. Love the idea.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Inucune@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago

That $300 stack of the cheapest thin paper was last semester. The online code you need for class is void, and the questions won't match the answer key.

[–] muzzle@lemmy.zip 16 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Physics books are never outdated, you just discover better models that work in a wider range of conditions.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Morganica@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Math is a thought game with axioms as rules. It’s much more stable since the rules are “self-evident”.

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Fuck you professor, its a 35 line proof, and it isn't as trivial as you think it is!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The correct way to learn math is chronologically

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 7 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Wrong. Good look fooling around without algebra for years. New methods make old maths easy.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Start with set theory. After about 300 pages you'll be able to show what 1+1 equals.

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago

To be fair, the first 100 pages of that was justifying the set theory definition for what numbers are. The following two hundred papers are proving that a process of iterative counting we call addition functions in a consistent and useful way, given the set theory way of defining numbers. Once we get to that point, 1+1 is easy. Then we get to start talking more deeply about iteration as a process, leading to considering iterating addition (aka multiplication), iterating multiplication (aka exponents), etc. But that stuff is for the next thousand pages.

Remember, 0 is defined as the amount of things in the empty set {}. 1 is defined as the amount of things in a set containing the empty set {{}}. Each following natural number is defined as the amount of things in a set containing each of the previous nonnegative integers. So for example 2 is the amount of things in a set containing the empty set and a set containing the empty set {{}, {{}}}, 3 is the amount of things in a set containing the empty set, a set containing the empty set, and a set containing the empty set and a set containing the empty set {{}, {{}}, {{}, {{}}}}, etc. All natural numbers are just counting increasingly recursively labeled nothing. Welcome to math.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Good, I didn't wanna learn calculus anyway

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thelefthandpath@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 8 points 2 days ago (8 children)

You could make the same argument for things like mathematics before the discovery about imaginary numbers.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›