this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
662 points (96.2% liked)
memes
19192 readers
2306 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
says person who doesn't know enough about Maths to prove the order of operations rules, which literally anyone can do for themselves if they know all the operator and grouping symbols definitions 🤣🤣🤣
I have no idea who you're talking about, but it ain't me! 😂
the definitions of the operators 🙄
was precisely nothing
What you mean is I actually proved you wrong about "different conventions" (noted you still don't know the difference between conventions and rules), but you're pretending it never happened 🙄
And yet you were unable to reply with a proof. So sad.
Says person unable to point out in what way it wasn't a proof, so sad 🤣🤣🤣
I've given you the definition of a proof before, if you can't work out why what you wrote doesn't match you just can't do maths.
That's ok, as Barbie taught us "math is hard!"
You gave the defintion of one kind of proof. I'll take that as an admission then that you can't fault any of my proofs, since you can't point out anything wrong with any of them, only that they don't use the only proof method you know of, having forgotten the other proof methods that were taught to you in high school 🤣🤣🤣
I already know why it doesn't match, that doesn't make it not a proof, DUUUUHHH!!! 🤣🤣🤣 You need to go back to high school and learn about the other methods of proof that we use. You only seem to know the one you use in your little bubble.
Says person who only knows of ONE way to prove anything in Maths! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! 🤣🤣🤣
Taken as an admission that I have indeed proved my points then, as I already knew was the case.
Is THAT why you only know ONE method of proof - you learnt from Barbie??? 🤣🤣🤣
All mathematical proofs can be written in that form, otherwise they are not proofs. All kinds of proof are merely special cases of the general kind I told you about. You didn't know this?? Yeesh.
says person confirming he doesn't know much about Mathematical proofs 🙄
No they're not, and you even admitted at the time that it had limitations 🙄
Yes, I knew you only knew about one kind of proof, hence why I told you to go back to high school and re-learn all the other types that we teach to students
Hahaha ok sure thing buddy!