this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2025
824 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

15807 readers
2143 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 290 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Fake and gay.

No way the engineer corrects the mathematician for using j instead of i.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 2 days ago (6 children)

As an engineer I fully agree. Engineers¹ aren't even able to do basic arithmetics. I even cannot count to 10.

¹ Except maybe Electrical engineers. They seem to be quite smart.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Engineer here, I can definitely count to 10 tho

0 1 10

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

0 1 everything that comes after is simply summarizes as "many"

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Electrical engineers are the ones that use j though (because i is used for current)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

I am used for current

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

Having worked with electrical engineers, some of them are quite smart, the rest have lead poisoning.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

10? That’s the name some put to 1e1, right?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Except maybe Electrical engineers.

Yup, I can count just fine to the 10th number in a zero-indexed counting system: black, brown, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet, gray, white.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

The inner machinations of an electrical engineer is too complicated for me to understand, I think they might be thinking on a higher order to understand these circuits

Thats why I barely passed my electrical engineering class lol

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago

Right? They got that shit backwards. Op is a fraud. i is used in pure math, j is used in engineering.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 2 days ago (3 children)

How do we know it's gay though? OP could be a girl (male)

[–] [email protected] 57 points 2 days ago

Because it's 4chan. And there are no women on the Internet on 4chan

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 days ago

Sure OP is a girl. Guy In Real Life

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago

Newfag.

(sorry! seemed like the appropriate 4chan reply)

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The mathematician also used "operative" instead of, uh, something else, and "associative" instead of "commutative"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"operative" instead of, uh, something else

I think they meant "operand". As in, in the way dy/dx can sometimes be treated as a fraction and dx treated as a value.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think you mean operator. The operand is the target of an operator.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The operand is the target of an operator

Correct. Thus, dx is an operand. It's a thing by which you multiply the rest of the equation (or, in the case of dy/dx, by which you divide the dy).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'd say the $\int dx$ is the operator and the integrand is the operand.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're misunderstanding the post. Yes, the reality of maths is that the integral is an operator. But the post talks about how "dx can be treated as an [operand]". And this is true, in many (but not all) circumstances.

∫(dy/dx)dx = ∫dy = y

Or the chain rule:

(dz/dy)(dy/dx) = dz/dx

In both of these cases, dx or dy behave like operands, since we can "cancel" them through division. This isn't rigorous maths, but it's a frequently-useful shorthand.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I do understand it differently, but I don't think I misunderstood. I think what they meant is the physicist notation I'm (as a physicist) all too familiar with:

∫ f(x) dx = ∫ dx f(x)

In this case, because f(x) is the operand and ∫ dx the operator, it's still uniquely defined.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

My thoughts exactly lol