Despite the assertion stated above, there is very strong pressure in the academic community to obscure otherwise clear (or an approximation thereof) writing with meaningless equations. This seems counter-intuitive to getting the point across, unless the point is the obvious intelligence of the authors, as they are clearly capable of understanding the equations they use to obscure their information. I am ashamed to admit that I have been tempted to equationalize some of my own work, if only because it seems like it would be a service to science! itself. But turning a concrete idea into a variable like x doesn't add up to a very legible result, and it may even subtract from its value. You can even say that one of the consequences of abundant equations would be to make the result very much more derivative.
Although often ignored by the mainstream media, mathematicians are at times granted the limelight to expound on some particularly controversial set of theorems. I read about one such instance some time ago wherein a man known as a rogue mathematician postulated on the existance of God. I was immediately intrigued by the concept of a rogue mathematician, and curious as to how he obtained such recognition among his peers. And of course, I assumed his rogue status made him something akin to the James Bond of mathematics - licensed to prove. Reading on, I soon found my answers. According to this fellow, God's existance could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt starting with the initial binary premise that either he exists, or he doesn't, both of which are equally likely. Apparently being a rogue mathematician means you don't understand the fundamental tenants of probability. While that might make him a rogue of some description, I have to wonder how that equates him to being a mathematician. It seems to me that it would classify him as more of a rogue fool.
I've recently been investigating parts of the Sherlock Holmes oeuvre, and have been interested by some of the cultural references contained therein. One such is the notion that mathematics was then treated as a hobby, and several characters describe it as a good way to pass the time. Math was like the Sudoku of that period, if these accounts can be believed. Regardless, I believe that the proper person to catch a rogue mathematician like the one mentioned above would be someone similar to Sherlock Holmes. He's caught many rogues in his day, and even some who play at mathematics. And then we would all be saved from more meaningless yet mysterious equations.
Return to Jaridis Blade's Gallery of Quotes