Suppose, for a moment

>Suppose, for a moment,

Other urls found in this thread:

sciencemag.org/news/2016/08/cat-co-authored-influential-physics-paper
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>WLOG

>let

No, I will not let

>Consider

>this follows directly from the definition, indeed-

>just assume, for now,

>the bodies

>it must be the case that

...

>hence,

>therefore

>thus

>pure math

>it can be shown, that

>summa summarum

...

love the lambert product log

itt. brainlets who think they're smart but who haven't even realized that the platonic mathematical realm is more real than this universe.

>For the sake of this exercise, let us suppose

>in particular,

>allahu akbar

>let (X,d) be a metric space

If I changed one of your axioms, would you die?

For all

>if and only if

>If this is the case, we are done. Otherwise,

...

>we show...
>single author

>Exercise: finish the proof

>otherwise
>what follows is 7 pages of mental rape
which theorem, Veeky Forums ?

>canonical
>generic
>natural

Why do so many authors use mathiness as an excuse for terrible writing?

>all else being equal

their uni had a shit writing program that they didn't have any interest in anyway

>the proof is beyond the scope of this book.

>proof's last sentence begins with indeed

>Allow your suspension of disbelief to kick in for the next few statements

>now stay with me here

>'cause this is about to get spicy

>allow yourself to view this through the mind of a child

>hey guys anthony fantano, the internet's busiest music nerd

Hecke's theorem. If the generalized Riemann hypothesis is true, then the proof is a half page long. If it's false, it's 11 pages long.

>the previous three lemma are then invalidated

>(why?)

>scoopert doopert

Fucking kosmala

>the solution is completely arbitrary

>submit paper
>journal complains about use of "we" and "our" in single-author paper
>can't be arsed to rewrite paper
>add cat as coauthor
the absolute madman
sciencemag.org/news/2016/08/cat-co-authored-influential-physics-paper

kek

This gets me every time I read it

...

It would be very painful

>Assume

Attached: 1520193208381.png (488x463, 28K)

>(WHY?)

Attached: 1519518112842.jpg (186x208, 9K)

with no survivors!

Attached: 1512199479308.jpg (1356x2048, 587K)

>you should be able to

problematic*

>imagine, for a moment, system in Xth dimensional space

> >'cause this is about to get spicy

Attached: Spicy.gif (480x270, 2.11M)

>the proof is trivial

>left as an exercise

Attached: math-proof-1.png.jpg (401x301, 21K)

>ayo ayo! hol'up hol'up!
>*Smacks Lips*
>lemmee get dis straight

Attached: Piper harron.png (708x707, 61K)

>Suppose, for a contradiction, that

>Let's say that..

platonic forms are a philosophically incoherent concept

>The argument goes as follows.

>assume
>for each
>the n-1 case
>therefore
>such that
>there exists
>if and only if
>is a subset of
>is an element of
>the set of all real numbers
>coproduct over

Attached: 1511614480230.png (645x729, 41K)

>recall

Attached: Screenshot_2018-03-11-05-08-59.png (1280x720, 675K)

>the proof for this is in my other book

Attached: 1518576649311.jpg (420x673, 34K)

>Ben di tree while it young, cause when it old it go brek