Aaron Brown What’s Love Got to Do With It? Edward Frenkel is writing a protracted Dear John letter to popular misconceptions about math and mathema- ticians… he great popular science and science fiction author Isaac Asimov told a story about a university committee meeting in which there was much laughter and joking about a student named “Milton” flunkingT English literature, but no one noticed when a student named “Gauss” was failing in mathematics. I wish I could find the reference to this, but I read it long ago in childhood, and some Internet searching proved fruitless. I may have the details wrong – especially the name of the student date are smaller than Asimov’s. They also have cians, and writers. With these people, screenwriters flunking English literature – but I remember the a different slant. Asimov tried to show every- often assume they must be tortured to be authentic. point. Asimov complained that a scientist would be one how mathematics and science could be fun. But there are plenty of exceptions – movies built thought a Philistine if he expressed no interest in Frenkel instead celebrates the passion and inten- around well-rounded, friendly, artistic genius- music or philosophy, but that an artist could boast sity of mathematics at the highest level. He has es. And, even when artists are a bit crazy, it is an about not knowing enough arithmetic to balance done this through lectures which are a sensation excess of passion, “agony and ecstasy,” not some his checkbook. on YouTube, an erotic film, and, most recently, a incomprehensible twisted obsession from another Edward Frenkel is one of the great mathema- book, Love and Math: The Heart of Hidden Reality. dimension. The troubled artist is too human, the ticians in the world, and he made a similar point Frenkel’s film was motivated in part by the mathematician is inhuman. The artist gains relief much more recently. “Intelligent people would observation that the most popular mathematics by completing work, and that work is appreciated never say: ‘I don’t care about art or music.’ But it is movies portray: “a mathematician is on the verge by others. The mathematician’s frenzied quest just totally okay to say: ‘I hate math.’” Asimov’s solu- of a mental illness.” I assume he is thinking about drives him deeper into obscurity and incompre- tion was to give up science and devote himself to movies like Pi, A Beautiful Mind, Proof, and Good hensibility. explaining mathematics and science in an enor- Will Hunting. To be fair, there are sane mathe- It’s also interesting to think about the media mous body of fiction and nonfiction writing, as maticians in these movies (but they are never as treatment of real-life pure mathematician Grigori well as public speaking. Although he stopped doing brilliant as the crazy ones) and A Beautiful Mind Perelman, who proved the Poincare conjecture, research in 1958, he remained one of the most pop- did not exaggerate the facts of John Nash’s mental then turned down the Field’s medal and the $1 ular lecturers at Boston University until near his problems . But I agree with Frenkel that movies million Millennium Prize, among other honors. death. His stories inspired 26 movies, shorts, and are apt to suggest that mathematicians are either He explains himself clearly. He does not want to television shows. mediocre and dull, or brilliant and psychotically be a pet or celebrity, he does not want awards from Frenkel has continued his meteoric career in obsessed. people who aren’t qualified to judge his work, he mathematics, so his public education efforts to One interesting comparison is to artists, musi- is not interested in money, and he is unhappy with 8 wilmott magazine put mathematics up there with great art, or with He holds himself out unapologetically as concepts as fundamentally human as sex and death. The first step in Frenkel’s unorthodox strategy is to include brief but poignant autobiographical a pure mathematician, exploring abstract details. He skillfully sketches a character who is shy and brilliant, tough and sensitive. He has the relationships for the love of it great misfortune to be born under Communism, and in particular to be Jewish (according to USSR the extent that professional mathematics tolerates Malcolm is even more radically applied. He ethnicity rules, that is) in Russia in the 1980s. Yet, unethical conduct. He wants to do his math in has convinced himself that pure mathematics he is extraordinarily fortunate in his mentors and peace, and share it with honest people who under- is just a formal game, reasoning from axioms to colleagues, and in opportunities like being offered stand it (it’s not clear if he continues to do math or theorems, with no larger pattern or meaning. a visiting professorship to Harvard as a 21-year-old not). Therefore, he calls himself a “chaotician” and without a graduate degree (and in being allowed I think in any artist or philosopher this behavior works mainly with computer simulations of to accept it and emigrate to the West in 1990). He would be celebrated as authentic and simple hon- problems of practical interest. The principles he illustrates his personality through sharp portraits esty. Think of the kudos that Jean-Paul Sartre got espouses are empirical, such as: “life finds a way,” of incidents like disappointing his mentor by refus- for declining the Légion d’honneur and the Nobel rather than logical. ing the return to Russia or confronting a blustering Prize for literature, or the credibility that George The key seems to be whether the individual apparatchik bigot, inexplicably invited to lecture at C. Scott and Marlon Brando got for turning down is tethered to reality. It’s okay to lose yourself in MIT. their Academy Awards. All three cited reasons in abstraction, to see things no one else sees, to care His autobiography is interspersed with the general ballpark of Perelman’s. Yet, among these passionately about things no one else can under- accounts of some of his mathematical researches. four people, only Perelman is portrayed as a certifi- stand; as long as you return to general intelligibility He explains the problems in simple terms, but, able lunatic whose actions are irrational. Artists kill with solutions to real problems, or works that other unlike Charlie Epps, he does not try to motivate themselves, rock stars die of drug overdoses, polit- people can see and understand. Then you can be them. Anyone can follow his definitions of braid ical activists blow up strangers or set themselves on charmingly eccentric and happy. But if you are groups and his discussion of his explorations. fire; all these things enhance their reputations. But tourist rather than explorer, if you journey into They take no mathematical interest or training, a mathematician must be crazy to love math and abstraction for the joy of it, the popular fiction con- although a nonmathematical reader will have to want peace. A third comparison is to the personable and happy mathematicians in popular fiction, like Among these four people, only Perelman Charlie Epps of Numb3rs and Ian Malcolm of Jurassic Park. Although Epps is described as a pure is portrayed as a certifiable lunatic whose mathematician, his joy comes from applications. In a generic Numb3rs plot, Epps is given a puzzle actions are irrational relating to a crime and he sees the mathematical connection to some simple physical or social phe- vention seems to be that you are unstable, misera- plow through an unfamiliar amount of unmotivat- nomena. While he generally disappears to a com- ble, unsociable, and dangerous. ed details. puter or see-through erasable board to work out Edward Frenkel – unlike Isaac Asimov, Michael Why does he tackle these problems? Because it’s the details offscreen, the emotional high point is Crichton (the inventor of Dr. Ian Malcolm), and the fun and challenging. If that were the whole story, when he explains the advanced mathematical con- creators of Numb3rs – seems to want to challenge he would be like an applied mathematician, or cept in terms that the FBI agents and the television this compromise. He holds himself out unapologet- even a recreational one. He makes clear that there audience can understand. While these sidebars ically as a pure mathematician, exploring abstract is another factor. His problem choices are guided are not always integrally related to the plot, they relationships for the love of it. He does make a few by professional mathematicians who feel that the are usually both interesting and mathematically noises about the applicability of some mathematics, answers will open up new areas for exploration. sound. Moreover, Epps’ noncrime-solving research but it’s always the same quantum physics and pub- He feels keenly the fear that he is working on an includes cosmology and the mathematical basis of lic key cryptography and, as discussed below, he’s insoluble problem, or one with no elegant or useful consciousness, either of which could be either pure half-hearted about that. He wants to tell us about answer, or one he is unequipped to solve. Yet, that ^ or applied work, but tellingly they are described in the fierce emotions he feels: fear, doubt, disappoint- thrills him as much as daunts him. But when he ^ their applied terms. ment, joy, and triumph; and he’s not ashamed to finds the answers, he treasures having discovered wilmott magazine 9 AARON BROWN universal truth, unknown to any other human. Cryptography is actually a bad example. Yes, the shaky chain of human and computer judgments Writing up formal proofs is a tedious ordeal.