3 ms·
You might not say that if you’ve seen some of the amateur “proofs” of Fermat’s Last Theorem, the Riemann Hypothesis, or other famous statements. Really, in orde
by pmiller2 8y ago
You might not say that if you’ve seen some of the amateur “proofs” of Fermat’s Last Theorem, the Riemann Hypothesis, or other famous statements. Really, in order to contribute to mathematics, one needs, at minimum, a serious mathematical education, intelligence, and lots of persistence. Nobody can provide anyone with intelligence or grit, but the easiest way to get the required education is graduate-level study in mathematics, which is most easily done within the system itself. Beyond that, knowledge of and ability to navigate the culture of mathematics is helpful. There is a reason that not using Tex/LaTeX, and presenting standard material as if it were new are among the 10 signs Scott Aaronson lists that a paper supposedly presenting some mathematical breakthrough is wrong[0].
[0]: https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=304 https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=304
- dekhn 8y agoI said there was latent talent, not that cranks are legitimate. I do agree that to contribute in most areas of science and math one needs a great deal of training and persistence. Not so sure about intelligence. In my entire career, there have been a couple times when a complete outsider with little or no experience in a field came in and revolutionized it. But in those cases, generally the person was scientifically educated in an unrelated field.