Similarly to the one in the original comment, but actually a math one (and it’s one of my favorites): what is the indefinite integral of dx/dx?

]]>Setting aside what constitutes “good” in jokes, unfortunately this is really NOT a math joke. I suppose it can be called a linguistic joke – using the (English) language to produce something funny in the context of a math integral identity. Many very funny jokes are esoteric to mathematicians in this way but the humor comes from the language, NOT the math. Think about your joke in another language – would it even make sense?

A math joke should just involve math. For example, the joke about the student who shows that 16/64 = 1/4 by canceling the 6 in the numerator and denominator, is a math “joke”. Also its extenson that 166/664 = 1666/6664 = .. (and so on) .. = 1/4 by canceling the 6s. Is it a good or bad joke, or funny or not, I’ll leave to you.

Also many of the “proofs” that 1 = 2 are math jokes, most of which arise by canceling (dividing) both sides of an identity by zero! Thus the biggest joke of all is that we are back to the subject of this article, namely zero and its properties.

Not a log cabin but a house boat, as you have to add the C. ]]>

You are mistaking digital representations for numbers. Digital representations, even via symbolic lambda calculus, are merely integers any way you look at it.

]]>Howard Brenner

]]>Thanks for catching this! We’ve updated the article.

]]>But, Turing wrote exactly the opposite in his article: “A number which is a description number of a *circle-free machine* will be called a satisfactory number”.

A circular machine being a machine that gets stuck or loops forever without printing symbols of interest (aka “figures” in Turing’s article).

]]>https://archive.bridgesmathart.org/2010/bridges2010-111.pdf

Gerdes has other relevant papers.

]]>