256
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] nthavoc@lemmy.today 34 points 1 month ago

Oh that book is outdated. That's the second edition, you need the third addition to complete the one math problem I am basing your entire grade on for the course.

[-] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

"Why yes I do happen to also be the author of the textbook for this course, why do you ask?"

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 33 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Religious Texts: .. that text was written by some half literate guy living in a desert who heard tenth hand folk stories from his community from people who had died about a hundred years before his time, mixed in with legends, myths and fairy tales that are thousands of years old ... but it's all true because it came from God, believe it or you will burn in hell forever.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

You, a loser Christian, reading from a 2000 year old book of morality fables.

Me, a sophisticated Scientologist, reading from a 70 year old Sci-Fi/fad health trilogy.

[-] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

Maybe L. Ron Hubbard was a time traveller that had already started everything 3,000 years ago and decided to restart it all again 70 years ago.

[-] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The hypocrisy of any religious book being the words of their all powerful master while they give themselves the option to cherry pick which rules they wish to follow is astounding.

It’s one of the first things that convinced kid me that it’s all made up bullshit to control gullible people.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Artyom@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

And don't worry, it definitely wasn't completely written a thousand years later to push the preferred political agendas of the time.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 32 points 1 month ago

Programming: that book was printed a month ago, and it's already obsolete.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Thorry84@feddit.nl 25 points 1 month ago

Web development: Oh, that textbook is obsolete. It was written last year before Angular v18 was released.

[-] KingJalopy@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago

*French SpongeBob voice

"2 hours later"

[-] Spezi@feddit.org 4 points 1 month ago

Laughs in PHP + HTML5 + CSS3 + Vanilla JS

[-] PlexSheep@infosec.pub 4 points 1 month ago

Laughs about PHP

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nucleative@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Whoops, 18.1 just released breaking changes

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 month ago
[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

My favorite way to connect people with academia is pointing out how recently zero was invented because even the most reluctant “I don’t know math” person understands zero these days.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] pelya@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

Electron was discovered in 1897. If you own a textbook on chemistry which is older than that, put it up on Ebay in the antiques category.

[-] four@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 month ago

Newton lived in the 17th century, so if you got a textbook older than that give it back to the museum

[-] KingJalopy@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

I'll drop it off for anyone if needed.

I'm very trustworthy.

Very.

I promise.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

Computer programming books ... Lol we don't print them any more, they'd be obsolete before hitting the shelves.

[-] eronth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago

Do be fair, that's less because the fundamentals behind programming are changing and more because the specific implementations are changed all the damn time.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Gladaed@feddit.org 10 points 1 month ago

Wrong for physics. Models to describe reality don't magically become wrong just because a model with better predictive power is discovered. Most old models are special cases of newer ones.

[-] InputZero@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah, Newton wasn't just a science bitch who is wrong, sometimes. His equations are the special case of General Relativity when acceleration is very low. Which is the world we live in.

[-] CalipherJones@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

As a kid I thought Pythagoras was silly for making a math cult. Now that I'm older I get it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The really funny part is the other two are also just math.

The fabric of reality is woven from math, and that's beautiful.

[-] skisnow@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 month ago

I've got a pet theory that a hypothetical alien species' music would be more recognizably similar to humans' than their biology would.

[-] bootloop@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

This could make the plot of a great sci-fi book. Love the idea.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] entwine413@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

But math does change, and it has a lot in the last 1000 years.

[-] wsheldon@lemm.ee 9 points 1 month ago

Math doesn't change, we just learn more about it.

The mathematical knowledge we had thousands of years ago is still true, and it always will be.

[-] jonathan7luke@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago

Math doesn't change, we just learn more about it.

Isn't that true of almost all the sciences?

[-] truthfultemporarily@feddit.org 10 points 1 month ago

The difference is that if something is proven mathematically it's 100% certain and will not change. In other sciences you may be taught things that later turn out to be flat out wrong.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

Bingo, I was taught in genetics class in the 1990s that RNA played a role but DNA was the primary driver and now my understanding is the current consensus is RNA is the primary driver.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

When I was growing up, Minnie was the primary Driver, but now the consensus says that it's Adam.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

Not quite. Science is empirical, which means it's based on experiments and we can observe patterns and try to make sense of them. We can learn that a pattern or our understanding of it is wrong.

Math is inductive, which means that we have a starting point and we expand out from there using rules. It's not experimental, and conclusions don't change.
1+1 is always 2. What happens to math is that we uncover new ways of thinking about things that change the rules or underlying assumptions. 1+1 is 10 in base 2. Now we have a new, deeper truth about the relationship between bases and what "two" means.

Science is much more approximate. The geocentric model fit, and then new data made it not fit and the model changed. Same for heliocentrism, Galileos models, Keplers, and Newtons. They weren't wrong, they were just discovered to not fit observed reality as well as something else.

A scientific discovery can shift our understanding of the world radically and call other models into question.
A mathematical discovery doesn't do that. It might make something more clear, easier to work with, or provide a technique that can be surprisingly applicable elsewhere.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

There's a whole bit in The Incredibles about how math has changed since Bob was in school

[-] kamen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Mathematics ^teacher^: That textbook was written thousands of years ago, and it is still as useful and relevant as ever, but I want you to buy this one I co-authored instead for the mere sum of $120, otherwise you won't pass.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Theres a lovely scene in Star Trek where Picard is captured, then finds an exposed wire on the cell panel. He takes it and begins tapping out prime numbers, to show to the aliens’ mathematicians that they’re sentient and capable of thought, independent of language.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Fleur_@aussie.zone 5 points 1 month ago

The correct way to learn math is chronologically

[-] Gladaed@feddit.org 4 points 1 month ago

Wrong. Good look fooling around without algebra for years. New methods make old maths easy.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Software Development: You bought a textbook?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TurboHarbinger@feddit.cl 4 points 1 month ago

This was made by someone who doesn't understand any of it.

[-] negativenull@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago
[-] HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Philosopher to the right of the mathematician: "You're welcome for the axioms"

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] JackbyDev@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago

You could make the same argument for things like mathematics before the discovery about imaginary numbers.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
256 points (98.5% liked)

memes

16461 readers
954 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS