A What motivates famous mathematicians?

AI Thread Summary
Successful mathematicians often find joy in their work, treating it more like play than a chore, which can foster creativity and excitement. However, achieving this mindset requires a solid foundation of knowledge and skills, as the ability to explore ideas effectively depends on having a comprehensive "toolbox" of techniques and theorems. The challenge lies not just in the attitude but also in the discipline to engage deeply with mathematical concepts over extended periods. Examples like Paul Erdős illustrate that passion can coexist with rigorous work habits, highlighting the balance between enjoyment and effort. Understanding this dynamic can provide clarity for those entering graduate studies in mathematics.
themasterchief
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Math undergrad who would like to treat my work like play, like I am a kid ‘living out my dreams’ when doing research, but wondering if any successful mathematicians have such an attitude.
Hi all, I am a math undergraduate who studies math solely when I crave dopamine — when I feel a “kiddish,” soaring excitement. As a result, however, I am unable to focus for consistent, long periods of time and thus succeed at research. For this reason, would any of you happen to know if any successful mathematicians feel a kiddish excitement about their work, treating it less like work and lore like play? (And if so, whether you might have some concrete examples?) Or if there are no such mathematicians, what motivates them, if they don’t feel a kiddish excitement on a day-to-day basis?

TLDR: Ultimately, I would like to treat my work like play, like I am a kid ‘living out my dreams’ when doing research. If that’s tough in practice, though, knowing now, before grad school, would be extremely clarifying and deeply appreciated.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
themasterchief said:
TL;DR Summary: Math undergrad who would like to treat my work like play, like I am a kid ‘living out my dreams’ when doing research, but wondering if any successful mathematicians have such an attitude.

Hi all, I am a math undergraduate who studies math solely when I crave dopamine — when I feel a “kiddish,” soaring excitement. As a result, however, I am unable to focus for consistent, long periods of time and thus succeed at research. For this reason, would any of you happen to know if any successful mathematicians feel a kiddish excitement about their work, treating it less like work and lore like play? (And if so, whether you might have some concrete examples?) Or if there are no such mathematicians, what motivates them, if they don’t feel a kiddish excitement on a day-to-day basis?

TLDR: Ultimately, I would like to treat my work like play, like I am a kid ‘living out my dreams’ when doing research. If that’s tough in practice, though, knowing now, before grad school, would be extremely clarifying and deeply appreciated.
I think this guy enjoyed his mathematics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erdős
 
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint and FactChecker
themasterchief said:
TL;DR Summary: Math undergrad who would like to treat my work like play, like I am a kid ‘living out my dreams’ when doing research, but wondering if any successful mathematicians have such an attitude.

Hi all, I am a math undergraduate who studies math solely when I crave dopamine — when I feel a “kiddish,” soaring excitement. As a result, however, I am unable to focus for consistent, long periods of time and thus succeed at research. For this reason, would any of you happen to know if any successful mathematicians feel a kiddish excitement about their work, treating it less like work and lore like play? (And if so, whether you might have some concrete examples?) Or if there are no such mathematicians, what motivates them, if they don’t feel a kiddish excitement on a day-to-day basis?

TLDR: Ultimately, I would like to treat my work like play, like I am a kid ‘living out my dreams’ when doing research. If that’s tough in practice, though, knowing now, before grad school, would be extremely clarifying and deeply appreciated.
The problem is less the attitude as it is the toolbox! A wise man once told me, "You might have a brilliant idea at night, but you need to sit down and work on it in the morning!" The working part is crucial, and to work efficiently, you need a big toolbox, the bigger the better. This frequently occurs to me when I read Tao's blog and his theorems. It is playing with ideas at first glance, but a closer look reveals the incredible background that he has where he takes the proof techniques from. Playing with an idea is one thing, knowing possible theorems and techniques that could be applicable is another.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Bosko, pinball1970 and FactChecker
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...

Similar threads

Back
Top