Complete Captcha

• 3 years - 360 posts - Latest
• Thread: 576 Goods vs 306 No Goods

1. Economist
   f68a
   

   Can't believe OP forgot this one
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arran_Fernandez
   I've got couple more
   

   (...) thiel fellowship that aired on CNBC? IIRC Taylor Wilson won that one but there were a handful of math-blokes in that. I have their CVs archived but too lazy to find em). I also would post more but knowing how EJRM is I fear personal attacks (for instance there is this bloke who literally wore a anime t-shirt for award photo for math competition).

   Hi 0f43, well I emailed you, perhaps even before you posted this comment, and you didn't reply either by email or phone. I strongly suspect you are weighed down by massive Plominist preconceptions in your understanding of reasons why certain outcomes do or not occur, preconceptions that prevent you from looking in the right direction. There's nothing stopping you from contacting me if you want to hear more, because I have deep knowledge of what I am talking about. You'd just have to open your lugholes. Actually I'm surprised you didn't contact me because I took it at face value when you said you wish to hear views that conflict with your own.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

2. Economist
   3bea
   

   I don't think this really mattered, it just made some fellow grad students at Princeton dislike him. Most people don't care.

   Perhaps the real reason Evan struggled on the post doc market is that he's a well-known Trump supporter.
   

   I hadn't followed EO'D's career since he was at Churchill, but I'd hazard a guess that he may not have been so keen on a certain mentally deranged failed casino owner of a billionaire follower of Norman Vincent Peale before some of his experiences in academia. Note: I am explicitly marking this as a guess. My point is that there could have been at least some causation going in the opposite direction from that suggested.

   Can't we just call him Trump?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

3. Economist
   58a4
   

   I don't think this really mattered, it just made some fellow grad students at Princeton dislike him. Most people don't care.

   Perhaps the real reason Evan struggled on the post doc market is that he's a well-known Trump supporter.
   

   I hadn't followed EO'D's career since he was at Churchill, but I'd hazard a guess that he may not have been so keen on a certain mentally deranged failed casino owner of a billionaire follower of Norman Vincent Peale before some of his experiences in academia. Note: I am explicitly marking this as a guess. My point is that there could have been at least some causation going in the opposite direction from that suggested.

   Can't we just call him Trump?

   Sure, but the intended point of my epithets was to convey that before mid-2015 Trump was mostly known as a reality-TV billionaire with a persona that was marketed heavily to wrestling fans and as such I seriously doubt he was accorded much respect, or even paid much attention, in the O'D household. There wasn't a Trumpian political party or banner that could be waved before then. So why does a youngster who has been doing exceptionally well in his pre-research maths career decide to support such a person when the person morphs into a political leader?

   References on these boards to marathons and sprints - a metaphor that unsurprisingly is preferred to the tortoise-hare race - are lazy. When such a youngster progresses along a path that is not headed towards a Fields Medal and a professorship at a top institution, then if we assume it's not because they actually prefer another path in life (and why on earth shouldn't they?) it might be that the culture at certain institutions has failed them and it's not as if culture is completely incapable of change.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Good 0 No Giod !

4. Economist
   58a4
   

   Sure, but the intended point of my epithets was to convey that before mid-2015 Trump was mostly known as a reality-TV billionaire with a persona that was marketed heavily to wrestling fans and as such I seriously doubt he was accorded much respect, or even paid much attention, in the O'D household. There wasn't a Trumpian political party or banner that could be waved before then. So why does a youngster who has been doing exceptionally well in his pre-research maths career decide to support such a person when the person morphs into a political leader?
   References on these boards to marathons and sprints - a metaphor that unsurprisingly is preferred to the tortoise-hare race - are lazy. When such a youngster progresses along a path that is not headed towards a Fields Medal and a professorship at a top institution, then if we assume it's not because they actually prefer another path in life (and why on earth shouldn't they?) it might be that the culture at certain institutions has failed them and it's not as if culture is completely incapable of change.

   Several super-brilliant mathematicians have not been careerists: Leibniz, Grothendieck, Perelman. John von Neumann was undoubtedly a SBM but he serves a little too often as the go-to reference.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

5. Economist
   e77c
   

   Sure, but the intended point of my epithets was to convey that before mid-2015 Trump was mostly known as a reality-TV billionaire with a persona that was marketed heavily to wrestling fans and as such I seriously doubt he was accorded much respect, or even paid much attention, in the O'D household. There wasn't a Trumpian political party or banner that could be waved before then. So why does a youngster who has been doing exceptionally well in his pre-research maths career decide to support such a person when the person morphs into a political leader?
   References on these boards to marathons and sprints - a metaphor that unsurprisingly is preferred to the tortoise-hare race - are lazy. When such a youngster progresses along a path that is not headed towards a Fields Medal and a professorship at a top institution, then if we assume it's not because they actually prefer another path in life (and why on earth shouldn't they?) it might be that the culture at certain institutions has failed them and it's not as if culture is completely incapable of change.

   Several super-brilliant mathematicians have not been careerists: Leibniz, Grothendieck, Perelman. John von Neumann was undoubtedly a SBM but he serves a little too often as the go-to reference.

   SBM = Single Black Male?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 2 Good 0 No Giod !

6. Economist
   5819
   

   I hadn't followed EO'D's career since he was at Churchill, but I'd hazard a guess that he may not have been so keen on a certain mentally deranged failed casino owner of a billionaire follower of Norman Vincent Peale before some of his experiences in academia. Note: I am explicitly marking this as a guess. My point is that there could have been at least some causation going in the opposite direction from that suggested.

   Are you saying that it’s hard not to support T if you’re PH’s academic sibling?

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

7. Economist
   440b
   

   EOD supporting Trump wouldn't surprise me. He is a hardcore Zionist and Tradcath.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

8. Economist
   5b5c
   

   Mathew and Sawin are normal, integrated and productive. Mathew is doing particularly cool stuff.

   True. Akhil Mathew and Will Sawin are 3 levels above the other lemons mentioned in this thread.
   Akhil is on Clay Research Fellowship right now. Once the term of the fellowship ends, he will be directly hired as tenured faculty at Chicago or comparable places.

   AK deserves it. Will probably be retained by Chicago as tenured faculty.

   Incidentally, other Dickson Instructors at Chicago have not done so well in recent years. Wonder what happened to Brian Lawrence, who has disappeared from the personnel list.

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

9. Economist
   2ecb
   

   Mathew and Sawin are normal, integrated and productive. Mathew is doing particularly cool stuff.

   True. Akhil Mathew and Will Sawin are 3 levels above the other lemons mentioned in this thread.
   Akhil is on Clay Research Fellowship right now. Once the term of the fellowship ends, he will be directly hired as tenured faculty at Chicago or comparable places.

   AK deserves it. Will probably be retained by Chicago as tenured faculty.
   Incidentally, other Dickson Instructors at Chicago have not done so well in recent years. Wonder what happened to Brian Lawrence, who has disappeared from the personnel list.

   Brian took a second postdoc at UCLA: https://www.math.ucla.edu/~brianrl/

   2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

10. Economist
    5b5c
    

    Mathew and Sawin are normal, integrated and productive. Mathew is doing particularly cool stuff.

    True. Akhil Mathew and Will Sawin are 3 levels above the other lemons mentioned in this thread.
    Akhil is on Clay Research Fellowship right now. Once the term of the fellowship ends, he will be directly hired as tenured faculty at Chicago or comparable places.

    AK deserves it. Will probably be retained by Chicago as tenured faculty.
    Incidentally, other Dickson Instructors at Chicago have not done so well in recent years. Wonder what happened to Brian Lawrence, who has disappeared from the personnel list.

    Brian took a second postdoc at UCLA: https://www.math.ucla.edu/~brianrl/

    That would be his 3rd postdoc, after Columbia and Chicago. Is the struggle worth it?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

11. Economist
    5a69
    

    Brian took a second postdoc at UCLA: https://www.math.ucla.edu/~brianrl/

    That would be his 3rd postdoc, after Columbia and Chicago. Is the struggle worth it?

    He clearly thinks it is. I know any number of people who decided to leave academic math after postdocs at Chicago-level places, and they're all making a killing at hedge funds or in Silicon Valley. Heck, the second-tier PhD students at my MLM school have no trouble finding those kinds of jobs (though most of them do Silicon Valley stuff -- I think the major hedge funds prefer elite postdocs/PhD's). Brian isn't an id*t, so he knows that option is always open to him.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

12. Economist
    52a4
    

    Lawrence's recent work is very good. In fact, there's a Séminaire Bourbaki about it in a couple of weeks. Yes, it's co-authored with big names (the first paper with Venkatesh, the second with Sawin), but I'd be surprised if it's not enough for an AP position at a good department.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

13. Economist
    46cc
    

    Brian took a second postdoc at UCLA: https://www.math.ucla.edu/~brianrl/

    That would be his 3rd postdoc, after Columbia and Chicago. Is the struggle worth it?

    He clearly thinks it is. I know any number of people who decided to leave academic math after postdocs at Chicago-level places, and they're all making a killing at hedge funds or in Silicon Valley. Heck, the second-tier PhD students at my MLM school have no trouble finding those kinds of jobs (though most of them do Silicon Valley stuff -- I think the major hedge funds prefer elite postdocs/PhD's). Brian isn't an id*t, so he knows that option is always open to him.

    Looking at BL's publications, outside the two papers coauthored with senior/big stars there is a steep drop off of significance and quality. I guess a top-20 math department might be reluctant to hire him due to this lack of "insurance" on his productivity.

    While there are rare cases in which a single big paper significantly elevates one's career, the paper has to be single-authored and with top-level significance. (Examples are Yitang Zhang on prime gap, and Viazovska on sphere packing.) Outside those cases, hiring and tenure at top-20 places require sustained productivity at a high level. In that regard, BL is not very competitive. Since he is now a postdoc at UCLA, one can look at who UCLA recently hired as new APs. See Pavel Galashin or Hong Wang. Both got their PhD after BL. Those are the qualifications for a new AP at UCLA, which is not even in top-10.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

14. Economist
    531f
    

    BL should consider European departments. Some French universities are very good and helmed by top French mathematicians who preferred to stay in the comfort of home.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

15. Economist
    58ac
    

    Those are the qualifications for a new AP at UCLA, which is not even in top-10.

    It's not top 5 but it's probably top 10. Can you name ten better departments?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Giod !

16. Economist
    5b5c
    

    Those are the qualifications for a new AP at UCLA, which is not even in top-10.

    It's not top 5 but it's probably top 10. Can you name ten better departments?

    Chicago, Princeton-IAS, MIT, Harvard, Berkeley, Stanford, Columbia, NYU-Courant, Caltech, Yale

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 1 No Giod !

17. Economist
    5b5c
    

    Those are the qualifications for a new AP at UCLA, which is not even in top-10.

    It's not top 5 but it's probably top 10. Can you name ten better departments?

    Chicago, Princeton-IAS, MIT, Harvard, Berkeley, Stanford, Columbia, NYU-Courant, Caltech, Yale
    

    I forgot Michigan, which is also ahead of UCLA.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 1 No Giod !

18. Economist
    17de
    

    Those are the qualifications for a new AP at UCLA, which is not even in top-10.

    It's not top 5 but it's probably top 10. Can you name ten better departments?

    Chicago, Princeton-IAS, MIT, Harvard, Berkeley, Stanford, Columbia, NYU-Courant, Caltech, Yale

    I forgot Michigan, which is also ahead of UCLA.

    Yale and Caltech are not.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 4 Good 0 No Giod !

19. Economist
    c190
    

    Plz, no gossip about these people. I know one personally, he would not enjoy this.

    We are not here to sugarcoat bitter truth or flatter young prodigies who grow up to be just another insignificant adult. This forum is relevant because we do the opposite.

    Fancy way of talking about this forum being kiwifarms for disillusioned nerds. How many hours of the day do you spend looking up math people who did better than you ever could?

    2 years ago # QUOTE 4 Good 0 No Giod !

20. Economist
    c9b6
    

    I think people tend to scrutinize more severely those who achieve greater success in order to cope with feelings of inadequacy. I'm sure I'm observing this behavior here.

    This is embarrassing — fill your time with better endeavors.

    2 years ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Giod !

Reply »