Hello again. I say “again” not because I am personally familiar to you, but because a certain type should beand it is that type for whom I arrogate the right to speak. You may have forgotten us, but we shared your classrooms, study halls, and late-night problem sets not so long ago. But whereas you went on to become members of the “mathematics community,” we did not.
The details of why each of us failed vary, but they largely boil down to a simple truth: we did not have what it takes. Whether due to a deficit of will or intellect, we were not admitted to the fold. I myself fell in love with math late, completed a master’s degree at a decent university, and then had to face the facts with frank honesty: I was not smart enough to be the professional mathematician I had dreamed of being. I resigned myself to a career in engineering.
But I have retained enough aptitude to recognize the validity of the dramatic shift in the community’s sentiment over the past several months regarding the future of the field. I see many of you going through exactly what my type has already survived: the disorienting recognition that you may not (any longer) “have what it takes” to be a professional mathematicianespecially if the competition in three years is to GPT-Astra what Astra is to GPT-4.
I want to let you know that there is a world outside. One can still “mind-build” with mathematics much as amateurs choose to body-buildmaking oneself better and meeting a standard for its own sake, with no pretensions of ever stepping onto the Mr. Universe stage or winning a Fields Medal.
Many of us who once studied right beside you have lived in this space for decades. It really is not so bad.
Received 18 September 2026.
Add to the discussion