The Ultimate Calculus Casanova

Math nerds unite! The joke sets you up thinking it's going in a risqué direction with "There is only one thing girls want, and it starts with a P and ends in a S" but BAM—it's "Principles of Mathematical Analysis" by Walter Rudin! This legendary textbook (affectionately called "Baby Rudin" by mathematicians) is notorious for being brutally difficult yet elegant. It's basically the mathematical equivalent of that impossibly attractive person who's also incredibly smart and slightly terrifying. The meme brilliantly plays on expectations while capturing the true passion mathematicians have for elegant proofs and rigorous analysis. Trust me, nothing says "I'm intellectually serious" like having this brick-red book on your shelf!

Physics students everywhere are feeling this one! The equation "1/4 π ε₀" is part of Coulomb's law in electromagnetism, which has absolutely nothing to do with circles. Yet there's π, showing up uninvited like that one relative at family gatherings! 😂 This is peak physics trauma - you're deep in electric field calculations, and suddenly π crashes the party. The look of betrayal is perfect because in physics, π isn't just for circles - it sneaks into wave equations, quantum mechanics, and even thermodynamics. It's everywhere! Next time someone says "π is just for circles," show them this and watch their confidence crumble faster than a poorly designed experiment!

Whoever named these motion derivatives was having a blast in the physics department! We all know position, velocity, and acceleration, but then physics gets weirdly poetic: JERK, SNAP, CRACKLE, POP! Yep, the 6th derivative of position sounds like your breakfast cereal mascots got PhDs in physics. Next time your car stops suddenly, you can scientifically say "that was quite the jerk followed by a snap with a hint of crackle!" Wonder if the 7th derivative is called "milk-getting-soggy"? 🤔

This is a classic case of someone trying to apply mathematical set theory to social concepts without understanding how logical implications actually work! The notation in the title (A ⊇ B ⇒ A ⊆ B) is mathematically incorrect - if A contains B (superset), it doesn't imply that A is contained in B (subset). That's like saying "if all squares are rectangles, then all rectangles are squares" - which is demonstrably false! The tweet confuses subset relationships with categorical statements. In set theory, "trans women are women" would be expressed as "trans women ⊆ women" (trans women are a subset of women), but that doesn't logically imply the reverse statement "women ⊆ trans women" (all women are trans women). The person clearly slept through their discrete mathematics class and now thinks they've made some profound logical discovery. Next time, bring coffee to those 8 AM math lectures!

The mathematical identity crisis is real. In the top panel, the elementary charge (1.602 × 10 -19 C) is ready to measure electric charge while the derivative operator (d/dx) is confused because it expected Euler's number 'e'. Meanwhile in the bottom panel, Euler's number (2.71828...) shows up for work only to be met with disappointment from Planck's constant 'ħ' who was expecting the elementary charge. Just another day of constants and operators sharing the same symbols but living completely different mathematical lives. The struggle of notation ambiguity in physics is too real.

Ever tried booking a room at Hilbert's Hotel? WORST. CUSTOMER. SERVICE. EVER! 🏨 This mathematical nightmare hotel has INFINITE rooms, yet somehow they keep making guests shuffle around! The famous Hilbert's paradox shows that even when every room is full, you can still accommodate new guests by moving everyone to the next room (n→n+1). Pure mathematical madness! Imagine finally drifting off to sleep when the manager knocks: "Excuse me, could you move to room #28,493,617? We have infinity more guests arriving!" *eye twitch intensifies* No wonder this poor green fellow is losing his mind! 💤➡️😱