With an analogy to valuing art, Michael Atiyah says:
We all know what we like in music, painting or poetry, but it is much harder to explain why we like it. The same is true in mathematics, which is, in part, an art form. We can identify a long list of desirable qualities: beauty, elegance, importance, originality, usefulness, depth, breadth, brevity, simplicity, clarity. However, a single work can hardly embody them all; in fact, some are mutually incompatible. Just as different qualities are appropriate in sonatas, quartets or symphonies, so mathematical compositions of varying types require different treatment. Architecture also provides a useful analogy. A cathedral, palace or castle calls for a very different treatment from an office block or private home. A building appeals to us because it has the right mix of attractive qualities for its purpose, but in the end, our aesthetic response is instinctive and subjective. The best critics frequently disagree.
(Quoted from page 3 of The Proof is in the Pudding: The Changing Nature of Mathematical Proof, by Steven G. Krantz. Springer, 2011.)
For a brief biography of Michael Atiyah, click here. For images of or relating to Michael Atiyah, click here.
For a brief biography of Steven G. Krantz, click here. For images of or relating to Steven G. Krantz, click here.
Recent Comments