🧵 Is pure math harder than theoretical physics ?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 04:16:40 UTC No. 16173297
The Reddit answer is that you can’t compare the two. But really which is harder? And if you have to say that some areas of theoretical physics are harder than some areas of pure math but like number heart is harder than any are of physics that is a fine answer. I want to know how you would classify this. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to assume the stuff written does is harder than a lot of stuff pure mathematicians do. But like things like astrophysics for instance are child’s play for mathematicians. But still there are things in mathematics that even Edward written would have trouble with.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 04:34:22 UTC No. 16173307
Grigori Perelman showed the world what pure mathematics is, those sophists in academia could never walk away from a million bucks
Anonymous at Mon, 13 May 2024 04:40:32 UTC No. 16173314
>>16173307
The only thing more pure than Perlmans mathematical proof, is his soul
Cult of Passion at Mon, 13 May 2024 04:44:45 UTC No. 16173315
>>16173297
>Is pure math harder than theoretical physics ?
Literally the polar opposite.
.I get shit wrong in Pure Math, I just deus exachina its definitions and "no u".
Physics dont quite work like that, youre no Hawkings, sir...
Cult of Passion at Mon, 13 May 2024 05:11:50 UTC No. 16173352
>>16173315
In fact thats one of the reasons I like Pure Math so much is the freedom of creation it offers. Making the very tools needed to solve novel (Meta/)Physics equations.
I have this like...hyperdimensional tree of evolutionary measures, one 1 but inverted, converted, shadowed, redefined, so many different ways.
Evolutionary Cognition happens faster than (You) human-mortals were told...