4 ms·
Again, it's not clear to me that if you asked 1950s mathematicians to look at math journals in the 1950s, they would react very differently. You haven't present
by Chinjut 2y ago
Again, it's not clear to me that if you asked 1950s mathematicians to look at math journals in the 1950s, they would react very differently. You haven't presented any evidence of this.
It's certainly true that math is a more fragmented specialized field today than it was in the eras of Euler or Gauss, but without some more concrete evidence or objective claim, I don't know what is so bad about math journals today compared to 1950.
- Chinjut 2y agoFor what it's worth, I also have a PhD in mathematics and I also ultimately left academia with some disappointment at the gap between what it is and my sense or fantasy of what it once was or could be.
- esd_g0d 2y agoDo tell more... does it have to do with hyperspecialization, not being able to get fluent in a large enough proportion of the field as was the case in Euler's time, say?
- Chinjut 2y agoNo, while it may have been fun to be a generalist in Euler's era, that wasn't bothersome to me. To be clear, the issues I found in academia had little to do with math specifically, and affected academia broadly. The usual issues you've likely heard about dwindling ability to make a comfortable career of it without a great deal of luck.
- vouaobrasil 2y agoI will attempt a more rigorous study with citation figures and data analysis and write part two then.