Math Sex Math

Mathematics and Sex

These two words seem like they don’t go together, but in the book below they certainly do. Dr Clio Cresswell reveals how mathematics can unlock the secrets of love and sex, dating and mating. It’s time to shatter the stereotypes in sexual mathematics!

See the description on amazon:

Cover of math sex book

It might be an interesting read, but it seems to be written for a non-mathematician, so mathies beware. But if you’re just looking for a book about math sex then this is certainly the book to read.
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

Want an academic math job?

Tom Hull has a great piece on job interview advice for academic type math jobs. He wrote it over 10 years ago but recently revised it two months ago. You can find his interview advice on his webpage.

There is a lot of articles out there written to help people get jobs and survive interviews, but this article is specific for math majors wanting to go into academics. It includes questions you should expect at an interview, questions you should ask, what to do after the interview, and how to prepare for it.
He also has a bit on salaries and negotiation, which is very helpful. He suggests:
“I do recommend that, in pretty much all situations, you ask for a
higher salary during job offer negotiations … My reasons for
suggesting this are two-fold: … Most
faculty do not get paid enough, partly because Deans and Provosts are
supposed to keep salaries as low as possible. Asking for higher
salaries upon being hired helps “fight the good fight” in terms of
letting administrators know that we should all be paid more. But the
main reason to ask for more money is that this could be the ONLY
chance you’ll have to significantly increase your salary for a good,
long time. Most schools have very rigid policies for salary raises
… and
thus you might not see another significant raise until you get tenure
or promotion.”

So if you are looking for an academic job in mathematics, I highly recommend checking out his site for some tips.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5.00 from 2 votes)

Funny math pickup lines

Being without you is like being a metric space in which exists
a cauchy sequence that does not converge.

Since distance equals velocity x time, let’s let velocity and time
approach infinity, because I want to go all the way with you.

i = Ø when i am not with you.
Can I explore your mean value?

My love for you is a monotonically increasing unbounded function.

You are the solution to my homogeneous system of linear equations.

Your beauty defies real AND complex analysis.

What’s your favourite linear transformation?

I’ll take you to the limit as x approaches infinity.

Let’s take each other to the limit to see if we converge.

Come on baby, let’s off to a decimal place I know of and i’ll take you to
the limit.

Let me integrate our curves so that I can increase our volume.

Your beauty cannot be spanned by a finite basis of vectors.

My love is like an exponential curve. It’s unbounded

My love for you is like a fractal – it goes on forever.

My love for you is like the derivative of a concave up function because it
is always increasing. We’re going to assume this concave up function
resembles x^2 so that slopes is actually increasing.

You and I add up better than a riemann sum.

You’ve got more curves than a triple integral.

If I were a function you would be my asymptote – I always tend towards

I wish i was your problem set, because then I’d be really hard, and you’d
be doing me on the desk.


I’m not being obtuse, but you’re acute girl.

You fascinate me more than the fundamental theorem of calculus.

I hope you know set theory because I want to intersect and union you.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4.60 from 5 votes)

Dictionary of Definitions of Terms Used in Math Lectures

    I don’t want to write down all the “in- between” steps.
    If I have to show you how to do this, you’re in the wrong class.
    I hope you weren’t sleeping when we discussed this earlier, because I refuse to repeat it.
    I shouldn’t have to tell you this, but for those of you who erase your memory tapes after every test…
WLOG (Without Loss Of Generality):
    I’m not about to do all the possible cases, so I’ll do one and let you figure out the rest.
    Even you, in your finite wisdom, should be able to prove this without me holding your hand.
    This is the boring part of the proof, so you can do it on your own time.
    I couldn’t verify all the details, so I’ll break it down into the parts I couldn’t prove.
    The hardest of several possible ways to do a proof.
    Four special cases, three counting arguments, two long inductions, “and a partridge in a pair tree.”
One third less filling (of the page) than your regular proof, but it
requires two extra years of course work just to understand the terms.
    Requires no previous knowledge of the subject matter and is less than ten lines long.
    At least one line of the proof of this case is the same as before.
    4 out of 5 mathematicians surveyed recommended this as the final form for their students who choose to finish.
TFAE (The Following Are Equivalent):
    If I say this it means that, and if I say that it means the other thing, and if I say the other thing…
I don’t remember how it goes (come to think of it I’m not really sure
we did this at all), but if I stated it right (or at all), then the
rest of this follows.
    I’ll leave out everything but the conclusion, you can’t question ’em if you can’t see ’em.
    I’m running out of time, so I’ll just write and talk faster.
    I don’t want to write it on the board lest I make a mistake.
    Manipulate symbols by the rules without any hint of their true meaning (popular in pure math courses).
    I can’t find anything wrong with your proof except that it won’t work if x is a moon of Jupiter.
    Trust me, It’s true.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5.00 from 3 votes)

Funny Joke – The Integration of Pretty Little Polly Nomial

Once upon a time, (1/T) pretty little Polly Nomial was strolling through
a field of vectors when she came to the edge of a singularly large matrix. Now Polly was convergent and her mother had made it an absolute condition
that she never enter such an array without her brackets on. Polly,
however, who had changed her variables that morning and was feeling
particularly badly behaved, ignored this condition on the grounds that it
was insufficient and made her way in amongst the complex elements.

Rows and columns enveloped her on all sides. Tangents approached her
surface. She became tensor and tensor. Quite suddenly, 3 branches of a
hyperbola touched her at a single point. She oscillated violently, lost
all sense of directrix, and went completely divergent. As she reached a
turning point, she tripped over a square root protruding from the erf and
plunged headlong down a steep gradient. When she was differentiated once
more, she found herself, apparently alone, in a non-Euclidean space. She
was being watched, however. That smooth operator, Curly Pi, was lurking
inner product. As his eyes devoured her curvilinear coordinates, a
singular expression crossed his face. Was she still convergent, he
wondered. He decided to integrate improperly at once.

Hearing a vulgar fraction behind her, Polly turned around and saw Curly
Pi approaching with his power series extrapolated. She could see at
once, by his degenerate conic and his dissipated terms, that he was up to
no good.

“Eureka,” she gasped.

“Ho, ho,” he said. “What a symmetric little polynomial you are. I can see
you are bubbling over with secs.”

“Oh, sir,” she protested. “Keep away from me. I haven’t got my brackets on.”

“Calm yourself, my dear,” said our suave operator. “Your fears are purely

“I, I,” she thought, “perhaps he’s homogeneous then.”

“What order are you?” the brute demanded.

“Seventeen,” replied Polly.

Curly leered. “I suppose you’ve never been operated on yet?” he asked.

“Of course not!” Polly cried indignantly. “I’m absolutely convergent.”

“Come, come,” said Curly, “let’s off to a decimal place I know and I’ll
take you to the limit.”

“Never,” gasped Polly.

“Exchlf,” he swore, using the vilest oath he knew. His patience was gone.
Coshing her over the coefficient with a log until she was powerless,
Curly removed her discontinuities. He stared at her significant places
and began smoothing her points of inflection. Poor Polly. All was up.
She felt his hand tending to her asymptotic limit. Her convergence would
soon be gone forever.

There was no mercy, for Curly was a heavy side operator. He integrated by
parts. He integrated by partial fractions. The complex beast even went
all the way around and did a counter integration. What an indignity to be
multiply connected on her first integration. Curly went on operating
until he was absolutely and completely orthogonal.

When Polly got home that night, her mother noticed that she was no longer
piecewise continuous, but had been truncated in several places. But it
was too late to differentiate now. As the months went by, Polly’s
denominator increased monotonically. Finally, she went to L’Hopital and
generated a small but pathological function which left surds all over the
place and drove Polly to deviation.

The moral of our sad story is this:

  If you want to keep your expression convergent, never
allow them a single degree of freedom.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5.00 from 1 votes)

How to Turn a Sphere Inside Out Video

This cool youtube video shows how to turn a sphere inside out without making a hole, tearing it, or creasing it!

3d picture of sphere

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3.50 from 4 votes)

Jokes: Top 10 excuses for not doing your homework!

10. It’s Fermat’s birthday
9. I didn’t know whether “i” is the square root of -1 or “i” are the square root of -1.

8. I accidentally divided by 0 and my paper burst into flames.

7. I had too much pi and got sick.
6. I could only get arbitrarily close to my textbook.

It’s stuck inside a Klein bottle.

4. Someone already published it, so I didn’t bother to write it.
3. My 4-dimensional dog ate it.

2. I have a solar calculator and it was cloudy yesterday.

1. There wasn’t enough room to write it in the margin.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

How to prove it

Proof by vigorous handwaving:
    Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.

Proof by forward reference:
    Reference is usually to a forthcoming paper of the author, which is often not as forthcoming as at first.

Proof by funding:
    How could three different government agencies be wrong?

Proof by example:
    The author gives only the case n = 2 and suggests that it contains most of the ideas of the general proof.

Proof by omission:
    “The reader may easily supply the details” or “The other 253 cases are analogous”

Proof by deferral:
    “We’ll prove this later in the course”.

Proof by picture:
    A more convincing form of proof by example. Combines well with proof by omission.

Proof by intimidation:

Proof by adverb:
    “As is quite clear, the elementary aforementioned statement is obviously valid.”

Proof by seduction:
    “Convince yourself that this is true! “

Proof by cumbersome notation:
    Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special symbols.

Proof by exhaustion:
    An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.

Proof by obfuscation:
    A long plotless sequence of true and/or meaningless syntactically related statements.

Proof by wishful citation:
    The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of a theorem from the literature to support his claims.

Proof by eminent authority:
    “I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP- complete.”

Proof by personal communication:
    “Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete [Karp, personal communication].”

Proof by reduction to the wrong problem:
    “To see that infinite-dimensional colored cycle stripping is decidable, we reduce it to the halting problem.”

Proof by reference to inaccessible literature:
The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found in a
privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883.

Proof by importance:
    A large body of useful consequences all follow from the proposition in question.

Proof by accumulated evidence:
    Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.

Proof by cosmology:
    The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or meaningless. Popular for proofs of the existence of God.

Proof by mutual reference:
In reference A, Theorem 5 is said to follow from Theorem 3 in reference
B, which is shown to follow from Corollary 6.2 in reference C, which is
an easy consequence of Theorem 5 in reference A.

Proof by metaproof:
    A method is given to construct the desired proof. The correctness of the method is proved by any of these techniques.

Proof by vehement assertion:
    It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the audience.

Proof by ghost reference:
    Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in the reference given.

Proof by semantic shift:
    Some of the standard but inconvenient definitions are changed for the statement of the result.

Proof by appeal to intuition:
    Cloud-shaped drawings frequently help here.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5.00 from 2 votes)

Funny Flowchart – How to have sex with your math tutor

Click for full image:

funny flowchart about math sex

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4.40 from 5 votes)

Addicting Puzzle – It’s not Sudoku, it’s STRIMKO! Very addicting…

strimko example

Strimko is a brand new logic puzzle with numbers, just like Suduko. It is
based on Latin squares described by Leonhard Euler in the 18th century.

The rules are simple: each row and column of an n x n grid must contain the numbers 1, 2, …, n
exactly once (just like in Sudoku ), and each
“stream” (connected path in the grid) must also contain the numbers 1,
2, …, n exactly once.

is created and developed by The Grabarchuk Family. It’s basically a generalization of Sudoku as Sudoku can be thought of as having 9 streams.

You can play the addicting game at their website:

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)