Silicon? Nope, Complex Numbers!

The irony here is thicker than a textbook on differential equations. Those "Arabic numerals" everyone's panicking about? They're the ones you've been using your entire life: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. This is what happens when scientific literacy takes a vacation while fear works overtime. The same folks who'd be outraged about learning "Arabic numerals" probably don't realize they're already calculating their conspiracy theories using... Arabic numerals. Next up: Michigan forces students to learn the "foreign" concept of gravity. The horror!

Math textbooks have officially evolved from "the proof is trivial" to "the proof is literally illegal." This textbook takes procrastination to PhD level by claiming that proving a theorem without proper mathematical machinery would break international law. It's the academic equivalent of telling your professor "I'd show my work, but then I'd have to kill you." Next up: theorems that can only be proven during a solar eclipse while standing on one foot.

The eternal mathematical comedy of derivatives! Tom (labeled as d/dx) is gleefully attacking Jerry (e x ), only to discover the horrifying truth - no matter how many times you differentiate the exponential function, it just keeps spitting out more copies of itself! The derivative operator is basically stuck in an infinite loop of futility against its one true nemesis. It's the mathematical equivalent of bringing a knife to a self-replicating gun fight!

Dating in STEM fields is exponentially harder when you make basic math errors. The guy just tried to impress with his mathematical prowess by claiming the square root of 3x equals 3x to the power of 1/2 - which is correct! But she's rejecting him anyway, probably because she expected him to simplify it further to √3 · √x. The relationship never had a chance to develop... much like an improperly balanced equation.

This is peak number theory humor right here! The meme plays with the mind-blowing mathematical truth that if you randomly select a real number, the probability of getting a rational number is exactly zero. Why? Because rational numbers (fractions like 1/2 or 22/7) are countably infinite, while real numbers are uncountably infinite—essentially, the reals are SO much more numerous that the rationals are practically non-existent in comparison! It's like trying to hit a specific atom while blindfolded throwing a dart at the universe. Technically possible? Sure. Statistically happening? Nope. Zero. Zilch. The mathematical equivalent of finding a specific grain of sand on all the beaches in the multiverse.

Ah, the eternal quest to make mathematical notation less horrifying! In the top panel, we have the standard factorial notation where 5! = 120. But our brave mathematician rejects this conventional approach with disgust. Instead, they propose the revolutionary "120? = 5" format in the bottom panel—essentially asking "what number, when factorialized, gives us 120?" It's the mathematical equivalent of answering a question with another question, which is precisely how I respond to undergraduate emails asking for extra credit. Just imagine the chaos in textbooks: "Solve for x: 3628800? = x". Pure mathematical anarchy. I'm sure the International Mathematical Union would have an absolute meltdown.