A plan/frame work to be a mathematician

  • Context: Math 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Useful nucleus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mathematician Work
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the resources and frameworks available for aspiring mathematicians, particularly in comparison to a guide provided by physicist Gerard 't Hooft for theoretical physicists. Participants explore the value and relevance of various resources, including personal opinions on their effectiveness.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant shares a link to Gerard 't Hooft's website, seeking a similar resource for mathematics.
  • Another participant suggests Terry Tao's career advice as somewhat helpful but not directly analogous to Hooft's work.
  • A different participant criticizes Hooft's site, labeling it as primarily for "crackpots" and expressing doubt about its usefulness for serious mathematicians.
  • This same participant offers their own website as a better resource for aspiring mathematicians, although they acknowledge it may not cater to advanced learners.
  • Another participant defends Hooft's website, arguing that it provides valuable references and insights from a Nobel laureate, emphasizing its purpose in guiding young physicists.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the effectiveness of creating extensive lists of topics for aspiring scientists, suggesting that a more focused approach is preferable.
  • A participant shares a link to an article by Michael Atiyah, recommending it as a resource for becoming a research mathematician.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the value of Hooft's website, with some finding it useful and others dismissing it as inadequate. There is no consensus on the best approach or resources for becoming a mathematician.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the subjective nature of the resources discussed, with varying levels of experience and perspectives influencing their views. The discussion reflects differing philosophies on how to approach learning in mathematics and physics.

Useful nucleus
Messages
374
Reaction score
62
Someone in this forum kindly posted the link:

http://www.phys.uu.nl/~thooft/theorist.html#bottom

in which Gerard 't Hooft (nobel prize in physics) describes o be come a good theoretical physicist . Can somebody suggest or provide a link to an analogous plane but to be a pure mathematician?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In my humble opinion, that website is mainly for crackpots. That man may be a nobel prize winner, but i doubt if that site has any value whatsoever to anyone wishing to become one as well.

Although I am a humble ordinary mathematician, the kind mr hooft may disdain, I suggest that I have already done for you a good bit of what you ask, in my site here "who wants to be a mathemtician".

If you are very advanced I admit I have not given you much guidance on how to go further, but that list of topics on hoofts website is an absurd guide to becoming a nobel prize winner or anything else.

indeed it is hard for me to believe any self respecting intelligent scientist created that site. maybe his teenage son did it as a joke.

if you think that website is a model for instructing young geniuses i feel sorry for you. that site is for list makers, not brilliant discoverers.

really.

the site by terry tao suggested here however is genuinely useful.
 
mathwonk,

The thread you started "Who wants to be a mathematician" is really useful. I don't know how I didn't notice it before! Thank you for it!

Regarding Hooft's page, you don't have to feel sorry for me!
This page is not supposed to be a model to instruct anybody. The main purpose of this page is to tell young physicits what aspects of physics they should learn and what are some of the good refernces for these branches of physics.
I think a Nobel prize physicist opinion about good refrences, textbooks and the essential knowledge that one should learn really adds something. I can't see how you see this subtract something!

Anyways this my opinion you may like it or not and I'm neither a physicist nor a mathematician , I'm still a graduate student in an engineering departmanet who wants to expand his knowledge on his own.
 
im just saying it is silly to make a huge list of topics and say if you want to be a brilliant physicist start by learning everything on that list. that's ridiculous.

i also used to make such lists when i was a young man, but they are still silly. at a certain age we make these lists because we can see all the things we wish we knew and would like to have known if we had everything to do over.

thats just not the way to start a scientific career, except for an automaton, in my humble non nobel opinion. in fact as i said it is hard to believe that site is serious.but keep in mind i write these goofy opinions late at night and after grading tests or having the flu.

my site is also loaded with lists of books but i have not read most of them. i tend to agree with gurdjieff, who said something like: " if a man can even make a good cup of coffee you can already talk to him. or henry hay, who said, if you can do one trick well, you are a magician.

i.e. don't try to learn everything, just start by learning one thing well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 86 ·
3
Replies
86
Views
9K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K