Stupid beliefs

> I thought Cauchy was Japanese till i got to uni.
> "for epsilon > 0 there exists n such that Xn < X + epsilon" how the fuck does it mean that it converges!!!

Share your beliefs when you were younger

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_+_2_+_3_+_4_+_⋯
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Riemann's rearrangement theorem can't possibly be true
shit was so unintuitive

I used to think 0.999... = 1

>used to think the real numbers were well-defined

are they not?

I thought Godel was Indian or something like that.
Look at that guy's face.

>he thinks it isn't

>ö
>Indian

Typical burger

I thought if I read enough books on the Hodge conjecture I would eventually be able to solve it

I used to think [math]\sum \limits_{n=0}^{\infty} n[/math] diverges.

but user, you were right

well, it is a divergent series...

>The atomic model actually exists and isn't merely a tool developed to understand systems of interacting wave-functions.

you are like a little baby

>thought Lie was Japanese or something like that

> I kept reading Poincare like "Point-care".
Teacher was laughing me

Quite a lot of Americans itt

>thought nobuo yoneda was japanese
>thought 57 isn't prime
>thought brown representability doesn't hold in the homotopy category of pointed spaces

I used to think there were educated people outside of the US as well

>rises from his grave to shitpost

I used to think the Grothendieck construction of the codomain fibration was the only functor that taking slice categories induced.

Grothendieck, go home. You're drunk. Everyone knows Cat isn't a 1-topos.

i used to believe in god
lmfao what a dumb faggot i was

Thought magnets had little particles of gravity on them

thought time was linear :

But that's right you retard

I used to thing 0.999... ≠ 1, because my linguist parents would always say "there's a way to prove it" instead of showing me.

>abloobloo spoonfeed me everything otherwise I'll believe stupid shit
Could have worked out a proof yourself if you weren't lazy.

I used to think that there was a trivial proof for [math]c^n = a^n + b^n[/math] where n > 2

The proof literally shows you how to construct it though.

they are defined (can be defined) as equivalentclasses convergent infinite series (requires axiom of choice if im not mistaken).

How do you know there isn't? I still believe it. Or atleast semi trivial.

>Biology was a good degree
>Anything related to the liberal arts was useless and shouldn't be taught
>STEM wasn't a meme filled with autism

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_+_2_+_3_+_4_+_⋯

i thought that the smash product was associative
i don't know why, and i never bothered to prove it
this came back to bite me on my master's thesis

fortunately, there was another -albeit longer- proof

someone shed some light on this poor kid

ITT: brainlets

The only man who knew the trivial proof died

underrated

>Brouwer theorem can't be true. (Still sad we only covered 1,2 dimensions)
> "Why is axiom of choice even debatable? Shit's so obvious"

LE [math]-\frac{1}{12}[/math] XDD EPIC MEME BRO

Stop being a brainlet.

>quantum mechanics gives an accurate model of the physical universe

god I was a dunce in my late teens

I used to think current was actually the flow of negative particles

Just because a series has a Ramanujan sum doesn't mean it's not divergent