There are three primary theorems, just like colors.
- 1. All theorems are wrong.
- 2. All theorems are true.
- 3. Theorems do not exist.
However, it is important to note that many prominent mathematicians cite a fourth primary theorem:
- 4. The mere existence of theorems is retarded.
Still others posit:
- 5. Retards who cite the existence of theorems as retarded are themselves retarded.
Even more claim:
- 6. Idiots who argue about theorems are more retarded than the existence of theorems in general, which is of course, retarded.
To which the supporters of #5 claim:
- 7. Idiots who argue that people who argue about theorems are retarded are in fact retarded, and further are biased against the supporters of theorems because the supporters of theorems get more chicks (specifically, that one time that a theorem supporter got all the way to first base with a real woman, which in theory trumps even the best experience with inanimate objects. To which anti-theorem mathematicians claim is just further proof of how retarded theorems are, as it is clearly better to have "experiences" whenever convenient rather than having to deal with the inadequacies of actual human females.)
And so on...this is why we stick to the three primary theorems. Which, of course, leads logically to...
- 101. Stick to the three primary theorems.
“Theorems are retarded!”
The Third Primary Theorem is Retarded
Theorems don't exist? That is a theorem, therefore it is a logical impossibility. Thus whoever came up with it was fucking amazing, because he was able to make it into one of the three primary theorems regardless of its being patently false. That man is, and forever shall be a hero, as he was able to show what a bunch of idiots mathematicians are, even though they claim to be highly intelligent.
The Theorem of Sticking to the Three Primary Theorems is Retarded
Of course, this is circular logic, so see the above points 4-7 for a more in depth discussion of the retardation or lack thereof of theroems in general.