August 6, at 6: It seems that the IMU decided some time ago to promote mathematics in countries without a strong mathematical tradition or a collapsing oneinstead of giving an excuse to people like you and me to go on vacation. Davide Castelvecchi August 6, at 8:
Let me run a few words from a post above through the time machine: I suspect the present challenge is not how to best return to the road, but instead how to best thrive in the wilderness until a new road forward emerges.
For string theory, initially the formalism had the appearance of a constrained solution: Worth doing, but not at warp speed, with the foot of the public treasury pumping the accelerator.
Depends on whether this wilderness can be circumvented, or not. A problem for physics during its wilderness periods is that its innate immunity to institutionalism breaks down. Where string theorists are presently in denial is that after twenty years with little to show as corroboration, the program has now plunged deep in the heart of institutionalism.
Physics—falsely in my opinion—prides itself on immunity from this, based on a few rapturous decades here and there. The occasional rapturous decade has earned physics a certain kind of immunity from public scrutiny despite large inputs of public funds.
Most egregious, in my view, are the monoculture apologists: When this kind of fungus sprouts up, I can understand an impassioned banging of the shoe on the podium demanding a return to experimental confirmation. Can we roll back time to the glorious sixties?
Our drugs have become increasingly expensive. That the jungle is now lusher, thicker, and more impenetrable than ever? That funds are flowing to the most expensive physics project in human history? That the profession has become so abstruse that nothing short of a brilliant, full time practitioner within the inner sanctum is qualified to venture an opinion on whether results obtained over the past two decades justify the cost and talent expended?
Linguistics went through the same expansionary bafflegab: My question is this: Like the NASA program, physics has successfully spun off a fair amount of its futuristic gear to the benefit of other disciplines.
Fair enough, whether or not physics beats its own jungle back anytime soon. The unavoidable question becomes:2nd Review – A fantastic book that helps the reader to rethink their preconceived notions about success and hindrances.
Its the third Malcolm Gladwell book that I’ve tackled, and I think it’s my favorite. Gladwell is a great writer and has some fascinating observations to make. Jennifer Ouellette My Favorite Popular Math Books (nonfiction) 0 As a former English major turned science writer, I've always been a little mathephobic.
of Grigori Perelman and the Poincaré Jennifer Ouellette studied English at university and says she “stumbled into writing about physics”, eventually becoming a full-time science writer for popular-science and trade magazines. She has written two books: Black Holes and Quantum Cats.
A lead science writer for The New York Times—and lifelong yoga practitioner—examines centuries of history and research to scrutinize the claims made about yoga for health, fitness, emotional wellbeing, sex, weight loss, healing, and creativity.
Ricardo Castillo, PhD DVM, Instructor, Perelman School of Medicine at University of Pennsylvania Marcia Castro, PhD, Associate Professor, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health Eric Chivian, MD, Founder and Former Director, Center for Health and the Global Environment, Harvard Medical School.
Aug 06, · Luckily, a certain Times science writer told his brother, a mathematician, who in turn texted someone in the IMU leadership, who then finally arranged for the information to be sent to the Times science writer yesterday, which was just enough time to submit an article in time.