Live data from Hacker News

Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

imperial.ac.uk

71–80 of 111 posts

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#71
post #12
post #4

There is a 2014 Quanta Magazine article on Martin Hairer which I found interesting. https://www.quantamagazine.org/hearing-music-in-noise-martin...

One thing I learned: he did his work while at Warwick. Warwick is kind of under-estimated among UK universities. It's reasonably well-run (which makes it almost unique), regularly hires smart people, and doesn't have the Brideshead Revisited hangover of Oxbridge.

> doesn't have the Brideshead Revisited hangover of Oxbridge

I've watched and read Bridehead Revisited. Just curious what aspect of it you mean here: the aristocracy?

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically since Warwick was founded, it had a reputation for being the place people went to when they were rejected from oxbridge. This sounds bad but one subtlety with the U.K. system is that almost all students may apply to at most one of Oxford and Cambridge in any given year and those universities tend to get more sufficiently good applicants than they take in. If one of Oxford or Cambridge is commonly considered…

Don't a number of universities belong to that category? I've certainly heard it about Durham: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxbridge_reject

Yeah it's definitely Durham. I've never heard it said about Warwick.

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#73

I wonder how prize winners feel about such huge sums of money. Especially that very succesful people who win such prizes tend to win multiple prizes.

Also, what does a tenured professor of mathematics do with such a sum other than spend it on himself? It's not like he's going to build out a lab and hire a bunch of research staff.

We don't really have tenure like in America.

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#74
post #12
post #4

There is a 2014 Quanta Magazine article on Martin Hairer which I found interesting. https://www.quantamagazine.org/hearing-music-in-noise-martin...

One thing I learned: he did his work while at Warwick. Warwick is kind of under-estimated among UK universities. It's reasonably well-run (which makes it almost unique), regularly hires smart people, and doesn't have the Brideshead Revisited hangover of Oxbridge.

I don't quite follow what you mean by "Brideshead Revisited hangover" - from Wikipedia, it seems like it roughly means "nostalgia for the age of English aristocracy"?

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#76

I wonder how prize winners feel about such huge sums of money. Especially that very succesful people who win such prizes tend to win multiple prizes.

Interesting perspective. I guesss you can ask Roger Federer at his prime and other tennis players.

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#77
post #44
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Britain has a whole clutch of universities which are global research powerhouses but are scorned as boring redbricks (or whatever) by most of the locals and unheard of to most people internationally.

'...unheard of to most people internationally.' Taking this point further, I note there's a huge Anglo-Saxon bias in the prestige of Universities. I don't know why this is. I say this having studied at Oxford and Cambridge and noticed how 'unfair' it was that many French and German universities had undergraduate bodies with even higher selection standards, yet few people internationally would have heard of them. It s…

While I feel prestige is a nebulous thing (it partly owes to marketing, optimizing for rankings etc), it is something that has real world implications in terms of an institution being attractive to talent etc. and talent, like interest, compounds.

With respect to Anglo-Saxon institutions, I don't think all of it just mere bias.

The talent pool issue is not a negligible one. English-speaking universities simply have a larger pool to draw from, and the best American universities in particular have the advantage of being able to not only draw talent from the largest English-speaking country in the world (itself, though arguably India too if we count L2 speakers), but also tons of aspiring students around the world who also speak English (especially from large countries like China and of course India) who become alumni, achieve success elsewhere and go on to boost their alma mater in their spheres of influence. Also the spreaders of international influence (the media) tend to be predominantly English-speaking, so Anglophone universities are naturally boosted over others.

Most non-English speaking elite universities are limited in that way -- Ecole Polytechnique for instance is very famous (and very elite) in France but has trouble drawing talent from the rest of the world. Not as many people are interested in learning French vs English...

The other is "forward momentum" I think, which has to do with research $ for producing work that matters. US schools have real money to hire and do "stuff that matters", at a scale that would be inconceivable at universities in smaller countries. It's also easier to assemble the right team with when you have a big pool of people to draw from both domestically and internationally, and to provide a strong academic community for folks to thrive in.

Also universities that optimize for selective admissions at the undergraduate level tend to have different goals (say, grooming an elite class for the country's public, private sector, etc.) from research universities, whose goals are to generate discoveries (the latter tends to be considered, for better or worse, more prestigious). As such, you may not be surprised to learn, most elite universities (at the undergrad level) don't have strong research programs.

There's a metagame here, and our instinct is to think that education rigor is necessary and sufficient to produce prestigious universities, but I think in the modern world, other factors dominate.

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#78
post #44
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Britain has a whole clutch of universities which are global research powerhouses but are scorned as boring redbricks (or whatever) by most of the locals and unheard of to most people internationally.

'...unheard of to most people internationally.' Taking this point further, I note there's a huge Anglo-Saxon bias in the prestige of Universities. I don't know why this is. I say this having studied at Oxford and Cambridge and noticed how 'unfair' it was that many French and German universities had undergraduate bodies with even higher selection standards, yet few people internationally would have heard of them. It s…

> I don't know why this is.

> I say this having studied at Oxford and Cambridge

Hah! So not so smart after all then...

Re: Imperial mathematician scoops $3M Breakthrough Prize

#79
post #74
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I learned: he did his work while at Warwick. Warwick is kind of under-estimated among UK universities. It's reasonably well-run (which makes it almost unique), regularly hires smart people, and doesn't have the Brideshead Revisited hangover of Oxbridge.

I don't quite follow what you mean by "Brideshead Revisited hangover" - from Wikipedia, it seems like it roughly means "nostalgia for the age of English aristocracy"?

I think that's an accurate portrayal of the "ivy league" type unis in the UK. They may not be what they once were, but they have a particular romanticism about them that people aspire to attend them.
Post reply on HN