Infinite Sums In Real Life

The horror story in two integrals! The top one (∫1/x⁵ dx) is actually quite friendly—it's a basic power rule integration that gives you -1/(4x⁴) + C. But add that innocent little "+1" to the denominator, and suddenly you're staring into the mathematical abyss. That bottom integral (∫1/(x⁵+1) dx) has no elementary antiderivative. It requires special functions or numerical methods to solve. The face of pure dread in the second panel perfectly captures the moment when you realize your homework just went from "I'll finish this before coffee" to "I need to reconsider my life choices."

When mathematicians spot asterisks (*) instead of proper multiplication dots (·) or the cross symbol (×) in an equation, it's like finding a typo in the Constitution. The tweet shows a statistical formula from a government document where they've committed this cardinal sin of notation. In programming languages like Python, the asterisk makes perfect sense for multiplication, but in formal mathematical notation? That's basically announcing "I haven't opened a math textbook since middle school." The formula itself is trying to look sophisticated, but the notation is screaming amateur hour. It's like wearing a lab coat with the price tag still attached.

When your spouse wants intimacy but your brain is stuck on the derivative definition of calculus... Feynman's marriage didn't survive his relationship with mathematics! The man literally couldn't turn off his brain long enough to focus on his wife's needs. That formula isn't just defining the rate of change—it's defining the rate at which his marriage was deteriorating. The ultimate "sorry babe, thinking about other functions." Relationships require attention, but apparently calculus requires more!

Breaking mathematical news that would make Euclid spit out his coffee! This poor soul thinks they've cracked the Riemann hypothesis—one of math's most notorious unsolved problems—and "discovered" that 1705542 is prime. Plot twist: it's divisible by 2 (it's even!) and actually equals 2 × 852771. The Riemann hypothesis deals with the distribution of prime numbers and has stumped brilliant mathematicians for 160+ years, but sure, random Quora user, you solved it while everyone else was watching cat videos. The academic equivalent of announcing you've invented a perpetual motion machine using rubber bands and a potato.

That spike is what mathematicians call a Dirac delta function in its natural habitat. One moment the Titanic was just a ship, the next it was a statistical anomaly. The beauty of this graph is in how it perfectly captures the ship's entire career—from "unsinkable" to "oh wait, icebergs exist" in one elegant vertical line. That tiny blip near 2023? Probably just James Cameron releasing another director's cut.

Oh the beautiful harmony of divisibility rules... until number 7 crashes the party! The grid reads "2 THANK 3 YOU 4 ALL 5 FOR 6 HAVING 7 NOT YOU 8 EASY 9 DIVISIBILITY 10 RULES" - and it's hilariously accurate! While most numbers have simple tricks to check divisibility (divisible by 2 if the last digit is even, by 3 if sum of digits is divisible by 3, etc.), poor number 7 is the mathematical equivalent of that one friend who brings calculus problems to a pizza party. No clean trick, just pure mathematical chaos! That's why only the true math villains among us gleefully apply the test for 7 in calculations. The rest of us just grab a calculator and silently question our life choices.