[cmath] Nature turns down an obituary on Grothendieck by Mumford and Tate

[Robert Dawson]

On 12/16/2014 12:18 PM, Nassif Ghoussoub wrote:
> "I am prepared for lawyers and business people to say they hated math and not to remember any math beyond arithmetic, but this!?"
>
>   http://www.dam.brown.edu/people/mumford/blog/2014/Grothendieck.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=t.co

"All such people are expected to learn a hell of a lot of math." That, 
perhaps, misses the point.  It's not surprising or shocking that 
physicists and chemists don't know all the mathematics in the article - 
I will admit to not knowing it all myself.   What is shocking is that an 
editor who has, presumably, no compunction about exposing the tender 
minds of astronomers to obscure organometallic radicals, or mentioning 
rare wildflowers (by their Linnaean binomials, no less) in the presence 
of geologists, should feel that these scholars /should not//read /about 
mathematics that they do not know.

Mathematics is a large enough subject that we are all ignorant of some 
of it.  This seems more like being terrified of it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mail.cms.math.ca/pipermail/cmath/attachments/20141216/626aff8c/attachment.htm