Yup, I know it's not even remotely close to Valentine's day, I'm just being lazy ;-)

Yup, I know it's not even remotely close to Valentine's day, I'm just being lazy ;-)

# Google+ Page // Facebook Page // Twitter Page

## 21 Comments

## Leave a comment

Comments temporarily disabled.

# Google+ Page // Facebook Page // Twitter Page

New to Spiked Math?

View the top comics.

View the top comics.

**New Feature:**Browse the archives in quick view! Choose from a black, white or grey background.**Top Math Comics**

(Ranked by SM-CRA)

Other Sites:

Hmm. The rating of this one goes from PG-8 ("i choose u") to R ("i atop u") depending on the dialect of TeX.

But I have trouble parsing the quantifier statement. For all thee I love thee? Doesn't sound very romantic, if 'thee' ranges over the set of all women. Ok, I get it: 't' is the amount of time passed since the big bang, and we be the dedicated lover forever.

I read it as for all time > 0, my love during that time is > 0. i.e. I will love you always.

Still don't get the vector though.

I think the vector represents that he always want to be on top

It's not a vector. It's a binomial coefficient. "I choose u", get it?

<3(t) > 0, but in most cases <3(t) is monotonically decreasing....

But limit of heart(t) as t-> infty is zero :'(

The English translation is "I choose you" followed either by "For all time, I will love you" or "I will always love you".

I think it should be 0. So

I would say the top portion reads "i choose you."

The bottom part is for all time input greater than zero, then there is a function of love to time which is greater than zero.

the top part is actually an old notation for combination

so its the combination of i and u

Old notation for a binomial coefficient? It is the only one I've seen during my 30+ year career!

OMG IT WAS "VALENTINES DAY" YESTERDAY AT MY SUMMER CAMP!!!

what answer did you get? Did she resolve to your proposition with a bounded solution???

Of course, this doesn't give any indication of how much he loves the person, just that he does at least a little bit.

I've never hated you! In fact, I've found you pleasant to be around since as long as I can remember...

How bout, for all t>0 and all p in Population, LOVE(u, t) > LOVE(p, t)

Simpler fix: heart is a function whit real domain and image is the set {0,1}, either I love you or I don't.

ps: that's what you get for not defining something properly

ps2: ps was not a critic, just a fact

that works. true...

I'm not one for limiting ranges though. I beleive a continuum offers a better approximation of the real world. Restricting our model in such a way may render it useless when applied to other, related problems; such as how much we care for our cats, or if we love chocolate cake.

P.S. there are no criticisms in mathematics. There is only the truth.

I guess that depends on how you perceive love. I for one, am unable to grade it, at most compare two loved ones, but that could be "easily" represented by a function of domain L^2 mapping L, where L is the set of things I love.

ps: I agree in math there is only true, but in comics...

Kids, never mix Math and English. I realize t is time. But for the person that said t is thee and could apply over the set of all women, you fail to realize that thee is a second person singular object, and can never mean more than one person (for future reference, thou is the second person singular subject). For plurality you would use y or you (you is the second person plural object, while ye is the second person plural subject). Hope this helps in all your future endeavors (-:

The top part is read as "i taken u".

This is romantic? I thought it was about Pokemon. ;-p

Note, that the equation <3(t) = 1/t will satisfy the logical equation above. Just means that love is inversely proportional to time.. with the added result that limit t-> infinity = 0