[FOM] Fwd: The Ideal Mathematician

[Walt Read]

We shouldn't be too jealous of physics just because they have the
advantage of talking about the "real" world. Imagine explaining to a
general audience the work of Kwiat's group on counterfactual
computation, where a computer delivers an answer when not running.
http://www.mpq.mpg.de/~jbar/files/Hosten-Nature-439-949-952.pdf

Numbers, conceived platonically or otherwise, are far more intuitive
to most people than superposition.

-Walt

On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Sam Sanders <sasander at cage.ugent.be> wrote:
> Walt Read stated that:
>
>> But to say that, academically, most of us are in our own
>> little world is hardly libelous.
>
> One could go even further and state that all humans live in their own little world (some worlds being bigger than others),
> but that is neither what Joe Shipman meant, and not the point of the essay either (I believe).
>
> Yes, cutting-edge research is highly specialized and its results hard to understand to all but a few specialists.
> However, this does not mean that one cannot talk to people outside of one’s field X and try to get the general idea of
> “what do people in X do and what is X all about” across.  Lots of people (try to) do the latter, and they should.
> The exact subtleties and technical details are much harder (if not impossible) to communicate to non-specialists, of course.
>
> The essay intends to criticize those who do not even bother to “look over the garden fence of X”.
> Furthermore, Math has the added problem that while physics is about modeling and describing reality, i.e. “something real” for most humans, the world of
> mathematics has a less objective existence for most humans (excluding the platonists).  I would say the essay also  takes a stab at platonism too, perhaps even
> insinuating that platonism is a cause of the attitude “Not bothering to look over the garden fence of X”.
>
> In that sense, I would also call it libelous (and other less-suitable-for-FOM words).
>
> Best,
>
> Sam
>
> On 10 Jan 2014, at 23:52, Walt Read <walt.read at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Libelous? Hardly. It sounds like a description of almost any
>> specialty. In the last hundred years the growth of science and
>> technology has pushed the current research boundaries past the point
>> that the average educated person can participate. Do you think most
>> physicists could explain to people outside the field why the Unruh
>> temperature is important? Most specialties in medicine - cardiology,
>> radiology, surgery - involve subtleties that the typical patient won't
>> be able o understand - often even when the patient is also a
>> physician. Opera singers, plumbers and chefs deal with issues that
>> would be esoteric to most of their consumers. Given the surge of
>> hostility to rationality and science in culture today, we should
>> treasure those people who can successfully connect with the larger
>> public. But to say that, academically, most of us are in our own
>> little world is hardly libelous.
>>
>> -Walt
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Joseph Shipman <joeshipman at aol.com> wrote:
>>> I didn't need to read the second half to get the point. It is an accurate summary of a certain type of bad mathematician, but it is libelous to regard this description as in any way representative of the norm.
>>>
>>> -- JS
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Jan 9, 2014, at 4:32 PM, Charlie <silver_1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    I would be very interested in FOMers' reactions to a short essay by Phillip J. David and Reuben Hersh entitled "The Ideal Mathematician".   I have been able to find the article in its entirety in a .pdf file accessible on the web, but pdfs are not permissible in this forum.  Below is a URL, which contains about half the essay, which in its entirety is 8 pages long, taken from their book _The Mathematical Experience_.)  To read the rest of the article, look for a pdf of it.
>>>>
>>>> http://forum.wbfree.net/forums/showthread.php?t=29870
>>>>
>>>>    Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Charlie Silver
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FOM mailing list
>>>> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
>>>> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FOM mailing list
>>> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
>>> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom
>> _______________________________________________
>> FOM mailing list
>> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
>> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom