tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc)

KConrad comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16342)

KConrad — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 18:41:34 -0700

Yemon and Francois: that person was in the military as part of ROTC obligations (if someone is in ROTC -- which he was -- and then serves in the military for a couple of years then it's fair to assume those are related), so it was compulsory military service after college.

Todd Trimble comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16340)

Todd Trimble — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 18:19:38 -0700

To be honest, the question has garnered a lot of non-answers. I won't lose sleep if the question is permanently closed. That said, I admit that I struggled hard trying to find something I thought I once read about someone having a successful mathematics career after being a designer of women's clothes. Now, that would have been an answer! :-)

Drives me nuts that I wasn't able to track that down.

François G. Dorais comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16339)

François G. Dorais — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 17:02:13 -0700

(Ah, got it! I didn't know what I was looking for; the "Military" section is a little tucked away and I dismissed it as some form of compulsory service, which doesn't make much sense given the dates but I wasn't thinking about that.)

Yemon Choi comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16337)

Yemon Choi — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:47:36 -0700

(Francois: perhaps I mis-read, but to me that CV indicated: 1986: BS in Applied Mathematics and Computer Science 1986-90: Officer, United States Army 199?-1994: MS in Mathematics 1994-1997: PhD in Mathematics etc. I think 4 years as a serving officer counts at least as an interruption.)

Will Jagy comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16336)

Will Jagy — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:22:28 -0700

In the re-closing, I gave the final vote. I thought the OP needed to hear that a math Ph.D. after a certain age is even less a guarantee of a job than when accomplished immediately after college immediately after high school. At the church I attended growing up, Father Platman was also a professor at a divinity school that specialized in late vocations, people, say, over 40, who realized a burning need to be ordained. But they were all told the odds of ever getting a permanent parish/congregation were low.

I have no clue why anyone would vote to re-open.

François G. Dorais comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16334)

François G. Dorais — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:09:54 -0700

(Yemon, I'm a little puzzled since the cv you link to seems to indicate continuous employment in mathematics since graduation.)

Yemon Choi comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16332)

Yemon Choi — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:05:46 -0700

To illustrate what I feel are the ambiguities: here's an example of someone having done a degree in maths, taken up a non-mathematical career, and then come back to become a professional mathematician. It's not clear to me if that is an example of what the OP was looking for...

Yemon Choi comments on "Famous mathematicians with background in arts, humanities, law, etc" (16331)

Yemon Choi — Sat, 01 Oct 2011 15:54:37 -0700

If I recall correctly, the question has been closed, re-opened, re-closed, and now has two votes to re-open.

I am more ambivalent about the question than my comments and voting record might suggest; my initial gripe is that the question is attracting off-topic answers, which do not stick to what the question asks for. They may be of interest to the questioner, but that strikes me as a different thing.

I don't have anything against the question per se, although it is on the softer end of the spectrum, so others might disagree. But it strikes me as being an example of an MO question that is easy to answer badly, where "bad" answers get upvoted, and where people might be adding poor answers months from now.