Quant View on Pure Math

[Daniel Duffy]

What is the prejudice against pure math grads for quant jobs? surely common sense would say that they could learn what they need to on the job?

Well, we don't know until you try. It's like throwing a judoka into an MMA ring.

Most pure maths is not constructivist

Constructivism (philosophy of mathematics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

My favourite is

Q: what is 2 + 3?
A: the same as 3 + 2
Q: why?(?)
A: because addition is commutative.

 

[seamusfinnegan]

Well, we don't know until you try. It's like throwing a judoka into an MMA ring.

Most pure maths is not constructivist

Constructivism (philosophy of mathematics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

My favourite is

Q: what is 2 + 3?
A: the same as 3 + 2
Q: why?(?)
A: because addition is commutative.

quant jobs are not difficult enough to justify finding minute differences between the two schools imo

 

[noether-skolem]

Well, we don't know until you try. It's like throwing a judoka into an MMA ring.

Most pure maths is not constructivist

Constructivism (philosophy of mathematics) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

My favourite is

Q: what is 2 + 3?
A: the same as 3 + 2
Q: why?(?)
A: because addition is commutative.

This reminded me of a joke back when I was an undergrad, "a module is a structure in which you can prove 0x = 0 but not 1x = x."

And of course the "Is there a good math joke?" "I can prove that there exists a good math joke, but my proof is non-constructive."

 

[Daniel Duffy]

This reminded me of a joke back when I was an undergrad, "a module is a structure in which you can prove 0x = 0 but not 1x = x."

And of course the "Is there a good math joke?" "I can prove that there exists a good math joke, but my proof is non-constructive."

well, good to see that at least 1 math joke exists, but it is not unique.