Howdy Huffers! Check out our newest photo site Ad Failure!
We’ve also launched some text based sites you may enjoy: Anti Joke, Anti Pickup Line, Pointless Superpowers, and Clarksonisms.
Howdy Huffers! Check out our newest photo site Ad Failure!
We’ve also launched some text based sites you may enjoy: Anti Joke, Anti Pickup Line, Pointless Superpowers, and Clarksonisms.
|
That's so sweet! ^_^
|
|
I don't get it..
|
|
This seems like something the creator of XKCD would write.
|
|
I don't understand any of that Math but I just <3 It
|
|
That is both cute and slightly disturbing
|
|
Actually, his description of the Taylor Series is slightly off. Rather than defining an=f(n), he should have put the infinite series from n=0 to infinity of ((f^n(c))*(x^n))/(n!). Other than that, his calculus is sound.
|
|
what the heck
|
|
It took me a minute to get this D;
|
|
I'll marry this person.
|
|
To the people who don't get this: you aren't going to find this funny, because nothing that needs to be explained is funny. But <3>.
|
|
argh this problem was on my calc 2 exam today :(
|
|
When I read that I didn't see it as <3>=bringing 3 fingers down, thus giving the teacher the bird... :/
|
|
Man, whoever spent the time to write that must REALLY less than three the other person!
|
|
aww
|
|
the cutest thing ever
|
|
LOL i "Less than three" this picture.
|
|
(OMG if someone sent that to me i would probably jump them)
I'm just wondering....what do you mean by "jump them"?? o.O
|
|
U should have used Cauchy's criteria instead of D'alambert's.
|
|
This is so sweet
i less than 3 this
|
|
i honestly think this is brilliant, to be honest if you look it over for just a second its pretty simple to understand aswell, i shall keep this for reference for a time where i have a decent math teacher ;-D
|