unpopular math opinions thread

>>7975920
This isn't an unpopular opinion

>>7975930
Apparently at my math department it is considering 80% of courses are analysis

>>7975920
Pure math is for ultra-spergs

>>7975920
math is unpopular in and of itself

Nah, that's fair.
Calculus is a waste of life for anyone not interested in physics. Would've rather had 3 courses of set theory, graph theory, probability...pretty much anything else.
I did learn how to juggle multiple things that I don't know or care about, without getting anything less than a B in any of them though. If I can do that, I like to think that I can handle mostly anything in academia.

>>7976011
Only by people who are too dumb for it, which is 99% of the population

>>7976073
>People too dumb for it
>99% of the population
So you mean only the remainder 1% of sperg lords?

>>7976000
In any math department 80% of courses are analysis.

Analytic combinatorics is a beautiful marriage of the two fields. Can't we all just get along?

Most math beyond undergrad is just intellectual wankery

>>7976008
>>7976011
>>7976558
You're contributing nothing

>>7976606
same wit hmath xDDDD

>>7975920
Infinite sets dont exist

>>7975920
Convince me that combinatorics is cool. I find most of discrete mathematics to be dull (other than the applications to algebra).

File: memesneedle.jpg (19KB, 543x403px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 543x403px

>>7976610

>>7976614
I just like counting things...

>>7976612
Do you consider the natural numbers a proper class?

>>7976612
>abstractions aren't really real

>>7975920
There's no such thing as "proof" by contradiction

>>7976614
Combinatorics is used extensively in high level poker play. It's a battle of math for money, that's about as exciting as it gets.

>>7976757
All proofs by contradiction or just positive proofs? I ask because in intuitionist logic you just get rid of double negation elimination but still have negation introduction. So for instance you can still do
>Suppose P
>...
>(contradiction)
>Conclude not P

But you can no longer do
>Suppose not P
>...
>(contradiction)
>Conclude not not P
>therefore P (double negation)

I definitely agree that double negation is bullshit and positive proofs by contradiction are bullshit but I don't see anything wrong with negative proofs by contradiction.