Live data from Hacker News

How have lack of travel and increased social isolation affected mathematics?

quantamagazine.org

21–23 of 23 posts

Re: How have lack of travel and increased social isolation affected mathematics?

#21

If you're interested, there's a paper on a more "extreme" situation that mainly related to Soviet mathematics developing solely within USSR apart from the rest of the world (see the "Luzin affair"). The paper examines the aftermath. https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/127/3/1143/192...

Note: that's in an economics journal, "The Quarterly Journal of Economics". Not sure what, if anything, that has to do with math.

Yes, it's one of the more reputable economics journals. Modern economics seeks to answer research questions (e.g. impact of research collaboration and global knowledge diffusion) using quasi-experimental settings (e.g. the unexpected fallout of the Luzin affair to mathematics research). Would be surprised to find this in a math journal if anything!

Re: How have lack of travel and increased social isolation affected mathematics?

#22
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The topic is math, not building megamachines. I've been following the progress in number theory proofs for the past few years, and email and forums have worked fine.

The parent explicitly talks about science in general. There is a tendency of some (often of those outside of science) that feel like science is getting worse over time and nothing of value is found anymore. The parent seems to echo this sentiment and gives very shallow anecdotes to make his point. Still it is the top comment as of writing. It’s just plain wrong in my opinion.

I didn't argue that science is getting worse in general and that nothing valuable is being done now, and that's not what I believe. I could see how someone could infer the former from the number of authors per paper increasing and me thinking that papers with many authors tend to be worse. My experience, at I said, could be field specific. (I work in fluid dynamics.) My view is more that science has never been particularly well done as a whole, though some recent things like the reproducibility crisis in social science and verification and validation in engineering have been promising.

That some projects require a large amount of expertise that no single person is likely to have is true. But there are disadvantages to having more authors as well, e.g., "design by committee" immediately comes to mind. And I don't think a majority of current projects require expertise that no individual could have to an extent that would explain why collaboration is expected in science. Ultimately I think a mix of the two would be ideal for science in general, with a larger contribution from individuals than is seen at present.

Also: If my example is a shallow anecdote than your CERN example is as well. I don't have hard data on any of this and you didn't mention any either. I'd be happy to look at any hard data that exists, but I don't know if there is any.

Re: How have lack of travel and increased social isolation affected mathematics?

#23

I have a genuine question, as someone with an interest in mathematics but alas, no natural ability in the area. Is there some kind of 'map' or list of mathematics areas, problems, etc. that professional mathematicians consult for ideas when conducting research? Likewise physics? It strikes me that we've collectively had at least 5,000 years of math-related research stretching back to ancient civilisations. Surely mos…

Background in pure math here. Generally researchers learn about what problems are fashionable as they talk to others in the field. As a PhD student, your advisor should give you ideas for problems to work on. Solutions to old problems tend to open up new lines of inquiry. It's a potentially infinite process, with the only limit being the capacity of the human mind.

The odd perfect number problem has been unsolved for thousands of years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_number

Why would anyone want to know the answer to this problem? The truth is that the motivation for most pure math research is purely aesthetic. You could also ask arts or english departments "How can you apply your paintings or novels?!?". Some mathematicians (mostly geometers and topologists) are inspired by problems in physics, but most aren't. In truth you never know what structure or theorem might have some future application; number theory was totally "useless" until modern cryptography made (some of) it useful.

For just a tiny taste of one small area of modern math, I dare you to click on any of the links here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floer_homology

We are flush with structures to investigate. The idea that "most discoveries have been made" is nonsensical in a domain where the discoveries to be made are literally infinite. To give a hint as to the infinite nature of mathematical inquiry, you probably are familiar with the idea of a function mapping a number to another number. A good deal of modern math is involved with much higher order functions; we can have functions that map functions to numbers, functions to functions, functions to spaces, and so on and so on. And then we can consider functions between those functions (and so on). Category theory is an attempt to give a framework to some of these "meta" relations. It should be obvious there is no limit to these structures and no limit to the number of problems one could pose about them.

Post reply on HN