3 ms·

It’s noteworthy because it’s from Terence Tao, regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. If you read the full post he’s making the exact s

It’s noteworthy because it’s from Terence Tao, regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. If you read the full post he’s making the exact same point as you: it’s common and normal to get a paper rejected even if you’re Terence Tao, so don’t treat a rejection like the end of the world.

vitus 2y ago
> regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. Oh? Perelman comes to mind (as the only person who has been eligible to claim one of the Millennium prizes), although he is no longer actively practicing math AFAIK. Of Abel prize winners, Wiles proved Fermat's last theorem, and Szemeredi has a number of number-theoretic and combinatorial contributions. Recently deceased (past ~10 years) include figures such as John Nash, Grothendieck, and Conway. Tao is definitely one of the most well-known mathematicians, and he's still got several more decades of accomplishments ahead of him, but I don't know that he rises to "greatest living mathematician" at this point. That said, I do appreciate that he indicates that even his papers get rejected from time to time.
- xanderlewis 2y ago
  Having been a child prodigy somehow gives one infamy (in the wider public consciousness) beyond anything one can achieve as an adult.
  - vanderZwan 2y ago
    He's a child prodigy who didn't burn out, that does make him quite rare.
    - xanderlewis 2y ago
      Well, true.
- flocciput 2y ago
  To add to your list, you can also find Richard Borcherds teaching math on YouTube.
- kenjackson 2y ago
  He said “regarded by many”, which I think is probably an accurate statement.
  - arrowsmith 2y ago
    I chose those words deliberately because I knew that if I phrased it too strongly then someone would reply to litigate the claim. Apparently I still phrased it too strongly, but hey, nothing's ever too pedantic for HN.
jraph 2y ago
> It’s noteworthy because it’s from Terence Tao, regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. I didn't know :-) > If you read the full post he’s making the exact same point as you Oh yeah, that's because I did read the full post and was summarizing. I should have made this clear.
motorest 2y ago
> It’s noteworthy because it’s from Terence Tao, regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. I think it's important to post a follow-up comment clarifying that papers are reviewed following a double blind peer review process. So who the author is shouldn't be a factor. Also, the author clarified that the paper was rejected on the grounds that the reviewer felt the topic wasn't a good fit for the journal. This has nothing to do with the quality of the paper, but uploading editorial guidelines on the subject. Trying to file a document in a wrong section and being gently nudged to file under another section hardly matches the definition of a rejection that leads authors to question their life choices.
- ccppurcell 2y ago
  Just a quick point: double blind is not common for mathematics journals, at least in my area. Some TCS conferences have started it.
  - infogulch 2y ago
    In many fields there are only a handful of researchers that would submit a paper in a given specialty, and a couple of them are the reviewers. At some point blinding is just futile.

vitus 2y ago

> regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. Oh? Perelman comes to mind (as the only person who has been eligible to claim one of the Millennium prizes), although he is no longer actively practicing math AFAIK. Of Abel prize winners, Wiles proved Fermat's last theorem, and Szemeredi has a number of number-theoretic and combinatorial contributions. Recently deceased (past ~10 years) include figures such as John Nash, Grothendieck, and Conway. Tao is definitely one of the most well-known mathematicians, and he's still got several more decades of accomplishments ahead of him, but I don't know that he rises to "greatest living mathematician" at this point. That said, I do appreciate that he indicates that even his papers get rejected from time to time.

xanderlewis 2y ago
Having been a child prodigy somehow gives one infamy (in the wider public consciousness) beyond anything one can achieve as an adult.
- vanderZwan 2y ago
  He's a child prodigy who didn't burn out, that does make him quite rare.
  - xanderlewis 2y ago
    Well, true.
flocciput 2y ago
To add to your list, you can also find Richard Borcherds teaching math on YouTube.
kenjackson 2y ago
He said “regarded by many”, which I think is probably an accurate statement.
- arrowsmith 2y ago
  I chose those words deliberately because I knew that if I phrased it too strongly then someone would reply to litigate the claim. Apparently I still phrased it too strongly, but hey, nothing's ever too pedantic for HN.

jraph 2y ago

> It’s noteworthy because it’s from Terence Tao, regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. I didn't know :-) > If you read the full post he’s making the exact same point as you Oh yeah, that's because I did read the full post and was summarizing. I should have made this clear.

motorest 2y ago

> It’s noteworthy because it’s from Terence Tao, regarded by many as the world’s greatest living mathematician. I think it's important to post a follow-up comment clarifying that papers are reviewed following a double blind peer review process. So who the author is shouldn't be a factor. Also, the author clarified that the paper was rejected on the grounds that the reviewer felt the topic wasn't a good fit for the journal. This has nothing to do with the quality of the paper, but uploading editorial guidelines on the subject. Trying to file a document in a wrong section and being gently nudged to file under another section hardly matches the definition of a rejection that leads authors to question their life choices.

ccppurcell 2y ago
Just a quick point: double blind is not common for mathematics journals, at least in my area. Some TCS conferences have started it.
- infogulch 2y ago
  In many fields there are only a handful of researchers that would submit a paper in a given specialty, and a couple of them are the reviewers. At some point blinding is just futile.