Computational mathematics Memes

Nietzsche meets mathematics in this brain-melting puzzle! The tweet references the famous "God is dead" philosophical quote while introducing us to the mind-boggling square-packing problem that apparently finished the job. Mathematicians spent CENTURIES trying to efficiently pack squares into a square with minimal wasted space. John Bidwell's 1997 solution for packing 17 squares (with that weirdly precise 4.675+ efficiency) is basically mathematical blasphemy - it's so elegantly chaotic it could kill a deity! The universe might run on math, but even cosmic beings would get a headache from this one!

The mathematical rebel in me is absolutely cackling at this! Someone just "solved" the ancient mystery of π by declaring it equals 3 + AI. Centuries of mathematicians calculating digits to the trillionth decimal place when they could've just added artificial intelligence to 3! This is like saying the formula for water is H₂O + memes. Next breakthrough: gravity = 9.8 + blockchain technology.

This is what mathematicians call a narcissistic number on steroids! Most people struggle with regular narcissistic numbers (like 153 = 1³ + 5³ + 3³), but some mathematical masochist decided to crank it up to the 39th power. The colors aren't just for show—they're to help you keep track before your brain melts trying to verify this equality. The probability of finding such a number is astronomically small, making this the mathematical equivalent of finding a unicorn that does calculus. Next time someone asks what mathematicians do all day, just show them this rainbow monstrosity.

From "humans with computers" to "computers with humans" to "computers don't need you anymore, puny mathematician!" The Four Color Theorem took humans decades to prove with computers in 1976. Now AI is saying "hold my digital beer" and threatening to solve the Riemann Hypothesis while we're still figuring out how to make our coffee machines work in the morning! Soon mathematicians will just push a button and go back to doodling fractals while the machines do all the heavy lifting. Progress? Maybe. Existential crisis for number theorists? DEFINITELY.

Mathematicians spend decades hunting for Mersenne primes—those rare numbers of the form 2 n -1 that are only divisible by themselves and 1. They build supercomputers, write specialized algorithms, and dedicate entire careers to finding the next one. Meanwhile, the cosmic joke is that these mathematical unicorns might be completely arbitrary constructs with no deeper significance whatsoever. The universe doesn't care about your elegant prime-finding formula—it's just us humans desperately seeking patterns in the mathematical void. The true punchline? We'll keep searching anyway. Nothing fuels academic obsession quite like the possibility that it might all be pointless.

The eternal struggle of math students everywhere! Batman Beyond (aka "Euler's Method") confidently shows up to solve differential equations, but our glowing skeleton villain is completely lost. "Do you have the slightest idea how little that narrows it down?" is basically every student trying to remember which numerical approximation technique to use on their calculus exam. There are like 50 different Euler methods—explicit, implicit, modified, improved, backward... The professor might as well have said "use math" as a hint. The panic is real when you're staring at that blank exam paper trying to remember if it's the one with the tangent lines or the one with the fancy error terms!

The mathematical equivalent of using a chainsaw to cut butter. This formula uses TREE(3) - a number so incomprehensibly large that writing it would require more atoms than exist in the universe - just to calculate e (2.71828...). It's like using the Death Star to kill a fly. Mathematicians in the wild, folks. They'll complicate anything for fun.

The peak of mathematical rigor in 2023: Googling whether Graham's number is prime and taking the first result as gospel. For those unaware, Graham's number is so incomprehensibly large that if you tried to write it out in standard notation, the number of digits wouldn't fit in the observable universe. Yet somehow Google confidently declares it prime in 0.35 seconds. Mathematicians who've spent decades proving primality for much smaller numbers are clearly wasting their time. Next research paper: "Prime factorization solved with this one weird trick. Peer reviewers hate it!"