Don't Abuse The L'Hôpital

Behold, the perfect marriage of physics and finance! That fancy differential equation on the left is just scientific window dressing for what traders already know—the market is completely unpredictable. Notice how the stock chart plummets despite all those Greek symbols promising mathematical certainty? That's the universe laughing at your 401k. This is basically every quant trader trying to convince investors that their algorithm can predict market movements when really they're just as clueless as the rest of us—but with better notation.

Google search suggestions reveal the true path to enlightenment: scientific notation. While others seek spiritual guidance, the real devotees express their faith in powers of ten. Nothing says divine revelation quite like writing 9,800,000,000 as 9.8 × 10 9 . The chosen ones don't pray—they simplify unwieldy numbers into a mantissa and exponent. Salvation through standardization.

Newton's sitting there with his fancy gravitational formula while Coulomb's brain literally lights up watching him. Classic case of scientific monkey see, monkey do. Coulomb later went "wait a minute" and adapted that inverse square relationship for electric charges instead of masses. Same mathematical structure, different forces. That's how science works—steal formulas from other scientists and hope nobody notices.

Just a friendly reminder that 2 degrees is about 0.035 radians, while 2 radians is approximately 114.6 degrees. That's the difference between a pleasant shower and summoning the fires of mathematical hell. No wonder STEM students have trust issues with unit conversions.

Behold, the infamous "challenging brain teaser" that's about as challenging as remembering to breathe. From the equations a+a+a=3 and b+b+b=6, we get a=1 and b=2. So a b = 1 2 = 1. The answer's literally just 1. I've seen more complex problems in children's cereal boxes. This is what happens when clickbait meets elementary arithmetic and calls itself a "maths master" challenge. Next they'll ask us to solve for x in "x+1=2" and call it quantum computing.

The mathematical aristocracy strikes again. In the world of angles, 270° is that awkward middle child who never quite fits in with the cool kids (90°, 180°, 360°). Meanwhile, the fancy gentlemen below—representing right angles, straight angles, and full circles—literally look down on the reflex angle from their geometric high horses. Classic angle elitism. Next they'll be saying they have better "degrees" of education.