3 ms·

But isn't it actually the case that if you don't stay in academia, then any hopes of you contributing to mathematical research pretty much have failed? Being i

But isn't it actually the case that if you don't stay in academia, then any hopes of you contributing to mathematical research pretty much have failed? Being in academia is the main way how people can be paid to work on research. If you're not in academia and not independently wealthy, chances are you're not doing research any more - some industries have big R&D labs doing fundamental research, but usually people going to industry would be just applying the research there and providing no research output that drives the field forward.

romwell 7y ago
It's the case most often now, but has not been historically. Consider that Fermat was a lawyer by occupation, and more recently, Fourier did a lot of things other than math. An academic job is not all research: the amount of time and effort spent on teaching and duties is huge. So why can't people employed in the industry continue contributing to science? The problem is mostly social, I think, and it's twofold: 1)It should become the norm to not work 5 days a week in technical fields (with a pay cut, if needs be). Not "work from home"; the mental space is scarce, and switching is hard. 2)There should be no friction in being involved with academia if you are not a part of it. People not officially affiliated with an academic institution do face friction. Ronin Institute[1] is a virtual organization that aims to address (2). As for (1), people should be prepared to enter industry from the very start, so that if they do, they would be able to confidently demand the conditions that would allow them to continue with research. [1]http://ronininstitute.org/ http://ronininstitute.org/