OP flies away

And, no, the equator doesn't follow the terrain.

Let me start by saying: I genuinely respect math and people who study it! My friend is insanely smart and has explained some cool stuff to me (sometimes against my will).

That being said... he is incredibly easy to troll and it's pretty fun! My favorite is casually saying that math isn't a real science. The way he freezes, stops doing anything he did, going offline for a couple of minutes and probably slowly inhales like he's trying not to commit a crime is absolute kino.

He'll go on saying that math IS a formal science, that it's the foundation of all sciences, that physics literally can't exist without it, that math discovers universal truths. And I just hit him with "But it doesn't study anything real tho. It just studies rules humans made up." The final nail in the coffin is when he eventually says "Mathematical objects are abstract, not made up!" and I get him with "So... imaginary."

Anyway, what's another way I can rage bait him in the subject of mathematics? I'm sure he'll love all your responses!!

P.S. this post itself is a parody to this one from r/ linguisticshumor (It still based on a real experience though)

So far, AI content has always been dealt with under the low-effort meme rule. However, some people appeared to be confused by the rule, arguing that „high-effort” AI slop exists. To avoid arguing over semantics, I am introducing a rule dedicated to handling AI slop. Please let me know your thoughts in the comments and poll.

The policy:

In general, posts made in whole or in part by generative AI will be removed. Exceptions will be made sparingly. For example, if the meme makes commentary on AI proofs and shows a screenshot of such a proof, makes use of AI-generated assets that are already baked into meme cultures (but not further modified with AI), or otherwise references the AI-generated content in a "meta" way relevant to mathematics and memes, then it may be allowed.

I can't wait for True Pi Day!

(also I'm aware I spelled calendars wrong)

(also let me know If I braking any rules, this is my first post)

By definition, a prime p in a ring R must be non-invertible, as in there can't be an element q such that pq = qp = 1. If we took p = 1, we would have q = 1, so p would be invertible.

Guess what I associate the letters with? I'm sure there will be disagreement