In maths, this does seem very dependent on what work your peers and community recognize as progress. Maybe problems that are more and more trivial should be con

In maths, this does seem very dependent on what work your peers and community recognize as progress. Maybe problems that are more and more trivial should be considered acceptable to publish, simply as being a contribution in filling in gaps. Or maybe the works of many more mathematicians should be tied together in larger contributions. More scientist will mean that overall we have more time to spend in the dusty cobweb filled corners that have yet to be studied in fine detail. And while many of those corners contain nothing interesting. If even one of them contains something truly undiscovered it's worth it right?