🚀 go-pugleaf

   Gary Merrill writes:

   >You can take a mathematician and lock him in his little office with just
   >some writing materials and he will (a) be pretty happy, and (b) be able
   >and willing to do anything of a mathematical nature.  Even a committed
   >*theoretical* physicist will be very distressed under such circumstances
   >since he has not way to determining whether his theories (however abstract)
   >are *good* ones.

Or her ...

In article <1992Nov6.024607.6831@galois.mit.edu> jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez) writes:

   >I hope you have not tried this experiment, because I don't think I, at
   >least, would stay happy for long in this little office.  

but I might ... bliss ... when can I start ?? :-) :-) :-)

Seriously, I think one has to restrict the original statement to talk
about pure mathematicians, and I'm sure many of them would disagree
much of the time. I think this has to do with the social nature of human
beings and the need to bounce ideas off people, and have them bounce
theirs off you, as a way of getting ideas; for the same reason
teaching is a valuable aid to research. The point is well made that it
is *valid* to consider doing such a thing to a pure mathematician, even
if it isn't the most *efficient* way for one to work. (The same
perhaps applies to some kinds of writers?)

Perdita Stevens, 
representation theorist turned software engineer,
definitely not speaking for my employer.