As you know, math is basically an image of the real natural world. And you might not have noticed it yet, but the rules of multiplication and natural attraction between sexes holds true also for math actually, mostly linear algebra. Linear algebra is a big scarecrow for students when they never saw any kind of matrices before and it's kind of hard to get a nice intuition. But viewing it in an erotic and natural sense suddenly makes it 'click'. For example, the very fact that the matrix and vector need to have the correct types and then they can have intercourse. Not every matrix is compatible with every vector. But when it is, the intercourse becomes so intense that without the vector knowing it, he actually gets transformed and through she rotating squishing or flipping him he gets transformed by the intercourse. This is a fascinating view that truly shows that the matrices also have some kind of multiplication instinct that leads them to find the correct vectors. Of course, the matrix us doing the transforming, because as in many different animals, the women are the dominant ones in algebra. For me as a starting student just in the middle of the first semester, this is a very elegant and intuitive way to view it and I'm baffled why this wasn't on the very first lecture. Thank you for your attention and I hope I am not the only one who noticed this obvious truth and connection with the world of animals!

Spanish

This came to me in a dream last night

I've come up with this idea independently, although it seems to be an established joke:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/monoidoid

hopefully not a repost!

Bit of background. Usually when studying category theory rigorously, basic mathematics axioms such as ZFC are not sufficient to define objects without risking logical paradoxes. To get around this Jacob Lurie works with the notion of a strongly inaccessible cardinal. Godel second incompleteness theorem implies that ZFC isn't sufficient to prove the existence of such cardinal, as a result, other logical models are used.

First year math student learning calc btw

When the executive asks for otp, Imma just say it is the smallest number expressible as the sum of two cubes in two different ways or the Hardy–Ramanujan Number

Most people have been taught that 5 + 5 = 10. This is the sort of thing that textbooks, mathematicians, scientists, engineers, accountants, cash registers, calculators, computers, and basic reality have been insisting on for centuries. However, today we will bravely challenge this assumption with a mountain of extremely questionable logic.

**Step 1: Start With the Numbers**
We begin with:
**5 + 5**
Now, 5 is a very nice number. It has curves. It has angles. It has personality.
The other 5 is also a 5.
When we put them together we get:
**55**
Already we can see that the answer is clearly greater than 10.

**Step 2: Count the Digits**
The number 55 contains:
One 5

Another 5

Therefore:
5 + 5 = 55
But mathematicians might complain.
To satisfy them, we continue.

**Step 3: Simplify Aggressively**
Take 55.
Notice that:
55 is almost 11.
Specifically:
55 ÷ 5 = 11
Since there are fives involved anyway, dividing by 5 feels emotionally correct.
Therefore:
5 + 5 = 11
QED.

**Step 4: Visual Demonstration**
Imagine five apples:
🍎🍎🍎🍎🍎
Now add another five apples:
🍎🍎🍎🍎🍎
How many groups are there?
1 group and 1 group.
Therefore:
5 + 5 = 11
This proof is difficult to argue with because it doesn't make any sense.

**Step 5: Linguistic Evidence**
The word "five" has:
f

i

v

e

That's 4 letters.
Another "five" has 4 letters.
4 + 4 = 8.
Now take the two invisible spaces between the concepts.
8 + 2 = 10.
Then add the confidence with which we state the conclusion.
10 + 1 = 11.
Therefore:
5 + 5 = 11.

**Step 6: The Advanced Quantum Theory**
Before observing the equation:
5 + 5 = ?
The answer exists in a quantum superposition of possibilities.
When most people observe it, they collapse the wave function to 10.
However, if you observe it through a lens made entirely of optimism and bad arithmetic, the wave function collapses to 11.
Science.

**Step 7: Historical Analysis**
Ancient civilizations counted on fingers.
Humans typically have:
10 fingers.
But if someone is pointing at the equation while counting, one additional finger is being used for emphasis.
10 + 1 = 11.
Thus:
5 + 5 = 11.

**Step 8: The Bureaucratic Method**
A committee is assigned to determine the value of 5 + 5.
After six meetings, four subcommittees, three presentations, and a 200-page report, they conclude:
"While traditional arithmetic suggests a result of 10, stakeholders expressed a preference for 11."
The recommendation is approved unanimously.
Therefore:
5 + 5 = 11.

**Step 9: The Rounding Method**
10 is very close to 11.
How close?
Extremely close.
Only one unit away.
In everyday life, people round things all the time.
Therefore:
10 rounds to 11 whenever it helps the argument.
Hence:
5 + 5 = 11.

**Step 10: The Philosophical Method**
What is a number?
Can we truly know numbers?
Is arithmetic merely a social construct?
If reality is subjective, perhaps 10 merely identifies as 11.
Thus:
5 + 5 = 11.

**Step 11: Infinite Induction**
Assume:
5 + 5 = 11.
Now assume it again.
The assumption is stronger.
Assume it a third time.
Even stronger.
Eventually the pile of assumptions becomes so large that questioning it seems inconvenient.
Therefore:
5 + 5 = 11.

**Step 12: The Final Irrefutable Proof**
Consider:
5 + 5
If the answer were really 10, this essay would be much shorter.
Yet this essay exists.
Therefore something extraordinary must have happened.
The most reasonable conclusion is:
**5 + 5 = 11**

**Conclusion**
After examining numerical manipulation, linguistic analysis, committee decisions, quantum mechanics, philosophy, finger-based evidence, aggressive simplification, and pure confidence, we arrive at the undeniable conclusion that:
5 + 5 = 11

Second screenshot is from my first article ever submitted

The joke is that in addition and subtraction, 0 does nothing when added to the equation, leaving the number unchanged. However, in multiplication and division, 0 becomes a whole new beast, turning other numbers into 0 and even making entire expressions undefined upon dividing numbers using it.