>>12312870Thats actually not the joke
>>12311274Well, this picture specifically addresses Moochizuki's IUT, but that shit is a meme and nobody cares about it, so I don't know why someone made a comic that references it.
However, from a more general perspective the comic still makes sense. It's 'joking' (in a non amusing, normie tier manner) about the contrast between existence proofs and constructive proofs in mathematics. The general idea, is that in math, you can often prove that some object or property X exists without actually finding a concrete example of X. It would be kind of like saying birds exist without giving a particular example of something like a penguin, chicken, crow, etc. Existence proofs that fail to explicitly 'construct' their respective mathematical objects are sometimes considered less satisfactory that explicit constructive proofs because they don't provide us with as much information.
The kid in the right-hand panel is standing in for a mathematician who has proved an existence theorem for some object X without actually constructing the object itself.
