this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
9 points (100.0% liked)

Math Memes

3205 readers
2 users here now

Memes related to mathematics.

Rules:
1: Memes must be related to mathematics in some way.
2: No bigotry of any kind.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NorthWestWind@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This guy would not be happy to learn about the 1+1=2 proof

[–] teft@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] kogasa@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not a 360 page proof, it just appears that many pages into the book. That's the whole proof.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Weak-ass proof. You could fit this into a margin.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Upvoting because I trust you it's funny, not because I understand.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a reference to Fermat's Last Theorem.

Tl;dr is that a legendary mathematician wrote in a margin of a book that he's got a proof of a particular proposition, but that the proof is too long to fit into said margin. That was around the year 1637. A proof was finally found in 1994.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I thought it must be something like that, I expected it to be more specific though :)

[–] zaknenou@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

late to the party, but that's actually one of the heartwarming and ridiculous at the same time stories of mathematics

[–] Sop@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Principia mathematica should not be used as source book for any actual mathematics because it’s an outdated and flawed attempt at formalising mathematics.

Axiomatic set theory provides a better framework for elementary problems such as proving 1+1=2.

[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't "1+1" the definition of 2?

[–] SzethFriendOfNimi@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That assumes that 1 and 1 are the same thing. That they’re units which can be added/aggregated. And when they are that they always equal a singular value. And that value is 2.

It’s obvious but the proof isn’t about stating the obvious. It’s about making clear what are concrete rules in the symbolism/language of math I believe.

[–] smeg@feddit.uk 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is what happens when the mathematicians spend too much time thinking without any practical applications. Madness!

[–] moody@lemmings.world 0 points 1 year ago

We all know that math is just a weirdly specific branch of philosophy.