Population Increases Exponentially

The mathematical tragedy where 60.6% of people think -3² = 9 instead of -9. Order of operations isn't a popularity contest, folks. This is why peer review exists – to save us from ourselves. In mathematics, the negative sign applies after the exponent, so -3² means -(3²) = -(9) = -9. But hey, at least democracy works great for choosing pizza toppings... just not for evaluating mathematical expressions.

Kid asks an innocent question about bridge load limits, and Dad unleashes the full artillery of structural engineering matrices. Those equations? Just the casual finite element analysis that engineers use to model stress distribution across bridge structures. The colorful simulation in the third panel shows exactly how much math goes into making sure you don't plunge into the river below. The kid's "Oh, I should've guessed" response is the universal reaction of anyone who's ever asked an engineer to explain something "simply." Next time you see a "10 TONS" sign, remember there's an engineer somewhere with 47 pages of calculations who'd be thrilled to explain it to you in excruciating detail.

The eternal academic hierarchy, displayed in its natural habitat: a Venn diagram. Physicists claim they "can get laid," mathematicians "mock engineers," and engineers... well, they "can't win a Nobel Prize." The central punchline reveals the one thing uniting these feuding disciplines: everyone agrees they're "better than chemists." The scientific equivalent of siblings fighting over who gets to sit in the front seat, except with more equations and fewer Nobel Prizes for engineers. Just another day in the STEM family dysfunction.

This textbook is basically saying "when your number is so massive it's stopped caring about small-time additions." Avogadro's number (10 23 ) is so ridiculously huge that adding 23 to it is like throwing a grain of sand into the Grand Canyon and expecting the tour guide to update the brochure. And then there's the "very large numbers" that are so astronomically gigantic they don't even notice when you multiply them by mere billions upon billions. It's the numerical equivalent of a celebrity too famous to acknowledge your existence. These numbers have transcended mathematical anxiety - they're just out there living their best life, completely unbothered by our operations. The footnote about "keeping track of leftover factors" is the textbook equivalent of a nervous laugh after making a dad joke at a faculty meeting.

That moment of pure mathematical betrayal when your line decides to pass through all the wrong data points. First panel: despair as your regression line misses almost every point. Second panel: the determination to manually force that line through specific points because who needs statistical integrity anyway? The rest of the data points can just deal with it. Linear regression? More like linear aggression against outliers. Every scientist knows that if your data doesn't fit your hypothesis, just redraw the line until it does!

The math trick in this meme isn't magic—it's algebraic inevitability! Let's break it down: when you take any number (x), multiply by 2 (2x), add 6 (2x+6), divide by 2 ((2x+6)/2), and subtract your original number (x), you'll always get 3. Why? Because the equation simplifies to x+3-x=3. The bottom panel shows the perfect reaction when someone realizes they've been bamboozled by basic algebra disguised as mind-reading. That demonic Shrek face is every mathematician's inner expression when watching people freak out over what's essentially just mathematical certainty in disguise.