Veeky Forums proves a theorem. Let's begin

> =/=

...

...

[math]\lim_{IQ\to\0} /b/ = Veeky Forums[/math]

...

[math]{卐} > {n}[/math]
[math]{n} < {0}[/math]

Let = jew

I like this thread already

[math]{}= jew[/math]

...

I assumed you were trying to declare a field.

Let (j(s)) be a function that describes the relationship between sage and worldwide jenkem huffing, then:

j(s)=e^(s/n)

[math] \displaystyle
\lim_{IQ \rightarrow 0}/ \text{sci}/=/ \text{b}/
[/math]

what is n?

nvm, my bad. I gotchu

unicode character U+2721 doesnt seem to work

let ₪ - jew

...

Cool it with the anti Semitic remarks.

...

[math] \displaystyle
\lim_{ Veeky Forums\rightarrow {卐}} \text{₪} = {n}= \text{0}
[/math]

I hope someone that works at your school sees this and you get expelled.

that's nice and all, but what are you implying?

ITT We develop a formalization of meme theory.
A meme ontology is a tuple (A,B) where A is the set of successful memes and B the set of all memes. To characterize successful memes we will need to formalize the notion of meme popularity. Which is left as an exercise to the next poster

[math]\displaystyle\rm {\color{red} A^{\displaystyle \color{yellow} u}}_{\displaystyle \color{green} t} \color{cyan} i^{\displaystyle \color{blue} s} \color{magenta} m[/math]

this

Suppose the Reimann Hypothesis is false and don't suppose the axiom of choice

Shitpost*Veeky Forums^sci>9000 Power level

You can tip 'em off for me. I'll give you a hint, I'm an orthodox Jew who has won some statewide highschool math awards.

Next poster here

Said exercise can be found in another thread

...

Define on [math]G=\{0,6000000\}[/math] the equivalence relation [math]\color{blue}{\underline{\overline{\star}}}=\{(0,6000000), (6000000,0), (0,0), (6000000,600000)\}[/math]. Then [math](G/\color{blue}{\underline{\overline{\star}}},+)\cong (\mathbf{Holo}(((\mathbb{J}))),+) [/math]

I got banned once for making this thread how come this guy isn't banned

Also p=/=np

Based

Just came from plebbit, I presume.

Proof of Lemma 193.13.1. Whenceforth, assuming the Wildberger-Barnett axiom, proving [math]0.\overline{9}\in (0,1)[/math] thusly follows .

Lmfao!!!

Sneaky bugger.

s is directly proportional to Shitpost:

s=k*Shitpost

Whats the notation for that? I don't know about equivalence relations.

...