Should i still do math if i am not the next Euler?

[lisab]

The point was that you don't need to be a braggart to say that a course or a concept in general is easy. Many says that high school is easy for example, are they braggarts? If someone say that college maths in general is easy is he a braggart? To many college maths is a breeze, the concepts taught there aren't all that complex etc.

I am sure that a lot of people would see your statements about things as being boastful just because to them those achievements seems unreal, do that mean that you are an obnoxious braggart?

I am sorry for bringing this up in the discussion, but I find it highly offensive that you have that opinion. Basically you require that anyone who is significantly smarter than you shut the hell up with his/her opinions or you dismiss him/her as an obnoxious braggart. No wonder smart people tend to get so introverted...

Do not tell me "basically what I require"; you're reading far more into my posts than what is actually there.

Braggart: One given to loud, empty boasting; a bragger.

Look, if you want to surround yourself with loud empty boasters, feel free! I have better ways to spend my time.

With respect to this thread: a young person writes that he's feeling a bit down, and has some doubts about his talents in a subject. He gives an example of something he struggled to understand (which he later said was not a representative example).

Some posters wrote into inform him that his example is sooooo easy to understand, blah blah blah. Not helping the OP one bit, but letting everyone know that it's not difficult to them. Now, why would someone insert themselves into someone else's thread simply to boast? That's obnoxious!

My inclination is to *help* the guy, to give some encouragement. Because at some point, most of us have felt down and doubted our ability to master this difficult subject. But that's no reason to quit.

The whole purpose of PF is to help people.

 

[Klockan3]

Do not tell me "basically what I require"; you're reading far more into my posts than what is actually there.

Braggart: One given to loud, empty boasting; a bragger.

Look, if you want to surround yourself with loud empty boasters, feel free! I have better ways to spend my time.

Read your post again:

Frankly I find people who say that it's easy to be boring braggarts (and they're likely liars, too).

Basically you are saying that those who say that it is easy are also boring braggarts. I agree that braggarts are not that nice to be around but that wasn't what I (Or this comment) was talking about.

Edit: I also agree that the guys making the "That is so easy" posts really served no function in this thread, if that was what you talked about then I excuse myself for the misconception.

 

[Mu naught]

Don't get too worried. Some people will simply have to work harder at math and science than others - that's the way of the world. If you love it, you'll be driven to work hard. If you find you don't have the ambition to work hard, then you're in the wrong field.

 

[D H]

Thank you Lisab

The same from me.

Could you just give it a rest Klockan?

Once again, the same from me.

------------------------------------

So you are having doubts about yourself, pdidy. Lots of people your age do. Lots of people of all ages do. Welcome to humanity!

I'll go with the mathematical odds and hazard that you are not the smartest person on the planet. That's not a dig at you, pdidy. It's just playing the odds. I suspect that the smartest person on the planet, whoever he or she is, is plagued with self-doubt. Questioning one's own capabilities is a sign of intelligence and maturity.

That you most likely will not be the next Euler (or Newton, or Einstein, or Nash) certainly is a bit crushing, but it is also liberating. You are free to do that which you are capable of, and without the pressure to win the Fields medal. Learn your capabilities, learn your limitations, and learn to overcome them.

 

[Aerithria]

I decided to major in math because I happen to have a natural talent for it, rather than physics, which I have to work every second in order to understand properly. And ever since I stopped taking physics, my average dropped from an A to a C+.

Talent means nothing. Passion means everything. Screw talent. If you aren't passionate about something, you can never be great at it.

And besides, the reason people go on in math is for the satisfaction of having something click in your brain after spending a frustrating amount of time working on it. Believe me when I say that it's extremely dull studying this stuff if you have nothing left to figure out.

 

[bignum]

I think the hard truth is, talent does matter, but without motivation and passion, talent is useless.

Newton didn't became who is he today by mere talent. A quote from him when someone asked how he developed his law of Gravitation, Newton answered "By thinking about it day and night"

 

[Aerithria]

I think you guys are downplaying talent. It is very important. Some mathematicians just have that x factor that others do not have.

Okay, well there's a difference between being downright terrible at something and 'kind of okay' at something. I came in assuming the latter. My opinion is, if you can eventually get it to the point where you're not failing abysmally, you probably have the ability to push through if you work hard enough. Essentially, if you're at the point where it is an option to stay (i.e. not on academic probation), you have talent. You just don't have genius-level talent. Which is fine. By "screw talent", I meant, screw going into something just because it comes to you more naturally if you don't love it, because you'll probably end up doing worse at that than what you're actually interested in.

 

[mal4mac]

How do you know you won't become famous? Remember that chemist who fell asleep and dreamt of snakes grabbing their tales thereby discovering the structure of Benzene? How could you have predicted such a strange but highly effective method of discovery? Just keep working hard, do the standard drudge work to get yourself technical qualifications, and who knows, you might also dream up a big idea. If not, all that everyday physics drudge work, and teaching, is very useful, and you'll get paid well for it. I remember seeing some Nobel prize winner on a pop sci programme saying he loved teaching 'cause for a long time he was never sure if his research would get anywhere, but if it didn't, he could still look back and see how useful he had been in teaching others. And he really enjoyed learning new physics and teaching it! As it happens his work did get somewhere big, but he was probably in the same state you are in for a long time - apart from keeping his gander up by realising he could have physics fun in other ways...

 

[eveo]

he just wants attention, I've been talking to him on MSN. he wants to do math for the prestige of being an intellectual, nothing more, nothing less.

he's just lost.

 

[ronaldoshaky]

Two orthogonal comments:

How did Euler know he was going to be the first Euler?

What is it with science and mathematics that provokes questions like this? You don't see it in other fields:

"If I can't be the star pitcher for the Red Sox, why learn to play baseball?"
"If I can't be a general - and also receive the medal of honor - why enlist in the army?"
"If I can't be a CEO of a Fortune 100 company, why go into business?"

It strikes me that the original poster wants to be famous, not a physicist or mathematician.

 

[Acut]

Some people want to get famous in science olympiads too (I don't know "real science" context enough to have a opinion about those fame-seeking people in it. However it's hilarious that some people publish their crazy unfounded theories on the internet and try to "challenge modern science", "make a revolution", "uncover a scientific conspiracy" or claiming "to have found critical errors in Einstein's relativity. It's fun the way they name their theory - "Peter field equation" - when their name happens to be Peter).

Two comments:
1)There are many easier ways of getting famous - science is simply not popular.
2)Those people never do any significant progress in olympiads. I believe they won't do any significant progress in "real science" either.

In fact, I dislike the fact many people know me simply because I do olympiads. I've found this is common in most students who do well in them.

@pdidy: If you want to be a "intelectual" there are other ways that wouldn't harm science. Please consider them.

 

[deRham]

"Should i still do mathematics if i don't have that Gift? Honestly i need help in deciding wether its ok and if so, how to motivate myself to continue..."

You need to develop an internal drive to study something by getting excited about the field. Once you find yourself understanding some of the deeper secrets of it, you will actually feel less like a nobody. Nay, you'll be able to appreciate WHY it is some of these famous people are famous. That breaks the mystique a little.

You will probably realize you don't necessarily have what it takes to do as groundbreaking work in the fields, because you have to make a living, and can't spend all your time obsessing about making a groundbreaking feat which may or may not come.

However, once you know what the experts are thinking, you can focus on making highly interesting contributions [which is hard to do, but doable, as opposed to revolutionizing a field].

 

[TMFKAN64]

I think you guys are downplaying talent. It is very important. Some mathematicians just have that x factor that others do not have.

Talent is important, just not as important as motivation and hard work.

The very best in any field have both in abundance, but you can be successful with lots of motivation and hard work, and only a bit of talent.

 

[i_emanuel]

The only person that can truly judge your commitment to science is you, instead of comparisons, tell us what are working on right now? is there a subject that truly captures your attention and passion to the extent of selfless dedication?

perhaps it is your soul which needs guidance, good luck :)

 

[sudarshanabcd]

the main thing is enjoying maths.
u shoud be curious enough to know what will happen next.
doin math for the sake of math is the best medicine.
not all intellectuals get rewarded , its just luck,
u shoud be at the right place at the right time, and
ready to take what nature gives,it could be an idea,
just some extra information,anything.

 

[Feldoh]

Perhaps our pdidy here and the rap singer are one and the same

How sweet would that be?! Rapping (Raping?) about physics and math lol

 

[estro]

It's like asking, should I still love my girlfriend if she is not Jessica Alba and will never be?

 

[jf22901]

It's like asking, should I still love my girlfriend if she is not Jessica Alba and will never be?

No you shouldn't!

 

[gretun]

Go for Engineering then

 

[stevenb]

Go for Engineering then

But, should he do engineering if he is not the next Nikola Tesla?

 

[gretun]

But, should he do engineering if he is not the next Nikola Tesla?

Oh, I thought he was just worried about finance.

 

[ronaldoshaky]

How sweet would that be?! Rapping (Raping?) about physics and math lol

ah yo yo yo yo i slapped a cap in yo Fourier transform azz
and ghost yo' spooky action at a distance muthafuqa. lol.

 

[h00zah]

The head of my maths department actually entered into university looking to get a degree in English, but discovered his passion for math and eventually became very good at it. What I mean is, he was by no means the next Euler or else he would have discovered math much sooner, but he found something he was passionate about and worked hard at it and eventually became successful. Some people can read a page and know the words on the page inside and out, while others have to spend an hour just trying to grasp ahold of the concepts, but a little bit of patience and determination will get you to the same place.

 

[n.karthick]

@OP
I feel it is natural for people who wants to make breakthrough often compare themselves with giants and worry about their inabilities. For example the great Fourier on his 21st birthday wrote

Yesterday was my 21st birthday, at that age Newton and Pascal had already acquired many claims to immortality.

who later published his greatest work "The Analytical Theory of Heat" when he was 54, in which he mentioned that

Profound study of Nature is the most fertile source of mathematical discoveries.


What I mean to say is if you have the ambition to become Euler, yes you can, provided you have the patience, confidence and most importantly HARD WORK

All the best

 

[bjnartowt]

I'm just fresh off my first year in grad physics, and I've been asking myself this same (excellent) question.

What I do in the face of this "crisis" is: find the ways I'm Not The Next Euler, and not try and hide it. We're scientists: our "major" is honesty, and I find it helpful to be honest with myself about my weaknesses. I think some of the greatest scientists came from not Being Good, but also knowing their weaknesses.

Any of you who said that the great minds of our field got there because of luck, well, I disagree: it just seems to me that there's no such thing as luck. I believe that greatness in math, science, and physics comes not just from the know-how of crunching through the equations, but also personal greatness. I know plenty of smart people who are so smart and work so hard they claim rigid-ownership of their work, and get really disillusioned if they are not rewarded for their hard work. I think the great minds somehow worked just as hard but made peace with not beign rewarded or lauded for all their hard endeavours... which has taught me detachment...which has, in turn, helped in many other non-science avenues in life (including personal relationships and my faith [I am a Catholic]).

So if you're not the next Euler: congratulations! You've become acquainted with your shortcomings, which everyone, even Euler, must have had in spades! The next step is to be honest about your shortcomings, and then work hard.

For instance: I'm studying, right now, for the Physics GRE. I'm looking at lots of Griffiths electrodynamics problems, but I don't have time to look at them all, because like you and perhaps like Euler too: I'm not perfect. So: I am being honest with myself: I write a note to myself saying "You skipped this problem". But I don't feel good or bad about that "fact" that I skipped teh problem...I just treat that as some objective fact I saw in the laboratory: it's the truth. It's honesty. And: that's right in line with the Mission Statement I've got for myself as a scientist: utter honesty.

Even as I write this, I'm kind of excited, anew, for my choice to be a scientist. It's so fortunate to have a path in life where I can follow personal principles. If I were an engineer or businessman, I'd have to swallow some corporation's mission statement and sacrifice a lot of principles. I just can't do that. So: Euler or not, I'm a scientist, b!tches : )

 

[Physiana]

I struggled with exactly the same question many many times. And I agree that the most stupid people are those who are unable to admit that the know next to nothing ;) They have come to believe that geniuses would know everything and have forgotten that even geniuses are humans and thus very limited.

So, the point is, if you are trying to understand deeply what you learn right now, it will of course be difficult. For almost everyone I know the first semesters in math were terrible. Also, I remember constructing some good and unique (in my course) math homework. But until I got there it was a true fight.

In my opinion the way you learn math and also physics (at least where I am now) is to torture your mind on ways of thinking and that is difficult in the beginning. Of course from the view of a graduate student the problems of first years seem to be almost trivial, but that is only because they have been there earlier.

So if you like it and if you think you can understand and do the rigorous way of thinking mathematics requires then don't give up just because you face some problems.

I don't think your question is actually if you become next Euler or Goedel or whomever. I think your question is rather is it so difficult, because I am stupid? My answer is no, it is difficult to most of us. What helps is a calm mind and not panicking after facing something that is difficult to understand. If that is your problem and if you won't be able to overcome that fear then it might be better to do something that doesn't require so much patience and is learning only instead of thinking ;)

Also try to see how much energy you waste by focussing on your personal skills. Maybe most problems would be easier if you would worry about them instead about your abilities ;)

Good luck!

P.S.: And even if one is not genious, science is working on problems together with many many others. They somehow also rely on your work being honest and correct. So even if I am not genious I can try to be as "true" as possible and it is much better to only talk about sth I really understand than "small talking" about almost every theory - which is what I have realized most people do. They just pretend to know everything but there are only very few that really understand what they do. So if for your mates everything is easy don't worry ;) most just pretend it is.

P.P.S.: Someone I knew quit his phd studies after few weeks after he heard a professor (70 years) saying that he still sometimes struggles hard to understand sth. That's science and better be prepared for that :)

 

[hadsed]

If you haven't, you should read some of Feynman's stuff. The man was brilliant, but in his own way. He loved just... thinking and understanding the most fundamental things, and in his fun he made one of the most important discoveries in his field of study. How? By calculating rotations of a spinning plastic plate thrown in the air by a student in a cafeteria during lunch one day, and taking it one step further. He knew he wasn't a genius, certainly not the genius that you may think these men are. They were simply curious, and if you are curious and you truly care about making discoveries not for your own gain, but to further the collective intelligence of the human race, then you will fulfill that goal if you work hard enough. And if you love it enough, you will WANT to work hard enough. It won't even BE work. Personally, once I get to thinking about anything, I have a drive to sit or go somewhere to figure out/learn how it works, why it works, the usual fundamental questions. It just so happens that I love doing this in physics via mathematics. That's my personal reason for wanting to do theoretical physics. I suspect that this is the same for all of the great scientists, known and [more importantly] unknown. Ed Witten would be nowhere without Feynman. Feynman would be nowhere without Einstein and Bohr. They wouldn't be anywhere without Planck, who would never be anywhere without Maxwell, who would never be anywhere without Newton. It keeps going and going and going. Somewhere, thousands of years ago, someone wondered how and why the sun came up in the morning and went down in the evening and why the sky is blue and how to make fire or how to kill animals easily. Building houses, catching fish, farming, these are all the humble beginnings of all of us. I think if you keep it in perspective, you won't lose hope.

If you don't become world famous, who cares? You've fulfilled your goal. To hell with Nobel Prizes.

 

[kramer733]

Most mathematicians don't get extremely famous until they're dead. So you never know. Perhaps your discovery on the field will become a huge breakthrough when you're dead.

 

[shinkyo00]

How do you guys deal with the fact that even though you enjoy Mathematics or Physics, you will probably never be the next Euler, Gauss, Nash, Einstein, Feynman etc? It really puts me off reading about how talented these people were.

Sometimes i just feel redundent. I will get frustrated when i can't understand something and i will feel stupid. The same thing occurs when i get a problem wrong, i will get quite pissed off and tell myself "fine this is it, no more maths for me" or "there goes being a math major"

Should i still do mathematics if i don't have that Gift? Honestly i need help in deciding wether its ok and if so, how to motivate myself to continue...

sorry if this post was a bit of a ramble

if you do bit of research, you'll find that feynman didn't have some sort of "special talent"!

there are many credible accounts by friends of his that he was just constantly thinking:

e.g. roger penrose is quoted as having said that he felt exhausted after talking to feynman about some topic in physics... but a friend of feynman's said that feynman was thinking about those topics all the time and if you will, think of it as a kind of "rehearsal"

another example is when feynman was taking a class and the prof had left some notes on a table before a lecture began. feynman went over and peeked at the notes and realized that it contained the solution to a very very difficult problem that was written on the board for that lecture. so when the prof walked in and presented the problem to the class, feynman simply said "well that's obvious!" and proceeded to demonstrate the solution, which he had already SEEN

if you want to know more, PM me and i'll give you some sources (there are many such accounts provided by close friends of his)

i'm not so sure about the other people you listed but as for feynman, i know it's not what most people think

 

[vanesch]

If I may add something, in line with several other comments here. First of all, as others said, your worries are normal: at a certain point in life, you have to realize that there are "better" people than you are. It's part of growing up, of becoming mature. Of course, as long as you think that you are the next Einstein, this is somehow stimulating - but sooner or later you will have to confront hard reality. I think it is a kind of syndrom that many "bright students" have to go through. I did too. Point is, if you are more than average interested in a subject, and you think a lot about it, chances are that up to college level, you will far outshine any of your co-students. So your only reference point is that you are "the best" in your immediate social environment, and that during years. Even if sometimes you aren't officially, you can always tell yourself the excuse that you have been unlucky on that occasion or something. That doesn't mean that you don't have to work, that doesn't mean that you won't get stuck,... but you compare and you see that others in your immediate social environment don't do really better. You have your chances to be "the best".
But at graduate/PhD level, suddenly you're mixed in with other "best guys" and you see that mileage can differ. That the world is a much bigger place than your classmates of high school. Worse, that you've made wrong choices in where to do what with whom. That the skills you found yourself so brilliant about, are, well, "not always in the market". So you finally realize that the next Nobel is NOT going to be yours. That it will even be terribly difficult to do SOMETHING immediately brilliant. At some point, you'll have to go through that bit of growing up (unless you ARE one of those happy few, but statistically, chances are much greater that you win the lottery...).

So what to do next ? Give it all up ? Throw it away ?
No ! Unless you did win the lottery, or are of rich descent, or will get married to Paris Hilton or something, you will have to do something terrible in your life: make a living!

And, at the same time that the world "got bigger" and you realized how much more smart guys and galls are out there, the world also got bigger concerning possible things to do. You wanted to be the smartest scientist, simply because, well, it's the only thing you could think of of doing in your life. But as your world view opens up, you'll see many other opportunities. You won't know what will there will be, you have to keep an open mind on what to do. It's good to have some dream (to keep motivated), but it is also good to let it go at a certain point, if you see that you can do something else.
And now comes the important thing: whatever you will want to do later, and whatever opportunities that will present, it is always more fun to do something that has something to do with stuff you like and you are good at, than "just anything". Scientific skills, mathematical skills are useful in society in a gazillion ways. Not only to "make science advance". In fact, if it were only to make science advance, science by itself wouldn't have much usage. Using science, using math, to DO something in the real world can be very rewarding. You might be surprised - well, *I* was - how much you can help in different places with just first or second year mathematics, thoroughly understood. You might be surprised how many people - even in important positions - aren't able to work out a mathematical problem related to their field of expertise, from beginning to end that you would expect to be an exam question in first or second year.
So there is A LOT OF ROOM for people having some good understanding of science and mathematics. You can do a lot of interesting things. You can be very useful (and be rewarded for it). Even if you are not Euler. Especially if you are not Euler, I'd say.

As a summary: in as much as you discover how many terribly smart people there are around and you're not in the competition for a Nobel or Field medal with them, at the same time you will discover how many more ignorant people there are that you will be able to help out (and are willing to pay you) with moderately good math / science problem solving skills.

At least that's my experience.

 

[abelgalois]

Ever wonder what made Euler, Euler? (Besides being a genius) One of the things that makes brilliant people brilliant is their "rage to master". They find their work intrinsically interesting. Well that's a pretty dull way of putting it. The topics that they study light a rapturous fire in their hearts. A fire that drives them to work feverishly, 10, 12, 14 hours(In Ramanujan's case, 30 hours!) every day, for decades improving, studying, and discovering.

One of the components for such inspired motivation is to value process goals and "improvement/learning" over end goals and perceived competence. Valuing how history will rank you, or how people will perceive your greatness, or even your grades over making progress, learning, improving and on the specific things does not produce lasting, long-term motivation to do math. Or to devote the long, exhausting hours necessary to do great work.

I suggest taking a long hard look at yourself. What do you really want? Because what's far worse than not being the next Euler is being 50 years old and realizing you wasted your time on something you only moderately liked to begin with.

And anyways, Euler was no Gauss!

 

[johng23]

Being the next Gauss would be nice, but even if you can't, at least you can have a career you actually enjoy. It seems like not many people in the world have that. You're going to spend most of your life working, that's really the more pressing issue.

If you don't enjoy it, you'll be miserable working 12 hour days trying to compete with all the people who seem to do that for fun. Whether you eventually make an impact or not, it isn't worth it.