<p>Without the question mark, this was the heading on an April 5 2013 <a target="_blank" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323611604578398943650327184.html"><u><font color="#0066cc"><i>Wall Street Journal</i> piece by the eminent Harvard biologist E. O. Wilson</font></u></a>, printed the next day in the paper. "During my decades of teaching biology at Harvard, I watched sadly as bright undergraduates turned away from the possibility of a scientific career, fearing that, without strong math skills, they would fail. This mistaken assumption has deprived science of an immeasurable amount of sorely needed talent. It has created a hemorrhage of brain power we need to stanch." Wilson argues that</p><ul><li> "exceptional mathematical fluency is required in only a few disciplines, such as particle physics, astrophysics and information theory. Far more important throughout the rest of science is the ability to form concepts, during which the researcher conjures images and processes by intuition."</li><li> The math can be outsourced, later: "When something new is encountered, the follow-up steps usually require mathematical and statistical methods to move the analysis forward. If that step proves too technically difficult for the person who made the discovery, a mathematician or statistician can be added as a collaborator."</li><li> Starting with math is not a good idea: "The annals of theoretical biology are clogged with mathematical models that either can be safely ignored or, when tested, fail."</li></ul><p> Wilson's dicta were sharply challenged by Edward Frenkel, the Berkeley Math Professor, in an April 9 posting on <i>Slate</i>, <a target="_blank" href="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/04/e_o_wilson_is_wrong_about_math_and_science.html"><u><font color="#0066cc">"Don't Listen to E.O. Wilson."</font></u></a> Frenkel addresses Wilson's lament about bright students driven from science by their fear of math. "Turns out he actually believes not only that the fear is justified, but that most scientists don't need math. 'I got by, and so can you' is his attitude. Sadly, it's clear from the article that the reason Wilson makes these errors is that, based on his own limited experience, he does not understand what mathematics is and how it is used in science." Frenkel quotes Galileo ("The laws of Nature are written in the language of mathematics.") and explains the power of mathematics in organizing our perception of the world. He concludes: "It would be fine if Wilson restricted the article to his personal experience, a career path that is obsolete for a modern student of biology. We could then discuss the real question, which is how to improve our math education and to eradicate the fear of mathematics that he is talking about. Instead, trading on that fear, Wilson gives a misinformed advice to the next generation, and in particular to future scientists, to eschew mathematics. This is not just misguided and counterproductive; coming from a leading scientist like him, it is a disgrace." (See Frenkel's <a target="_blank" href="http://math.berkeley.edu/~frenkel/Math53/"><u><font color="#0066cc">Multivariate Calculus lectures</font></u></a>.)</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>=================================================================================</p><p>출처:http://www.ams.org/news/math-in-the-media/math-in-the-media</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>AMS에 재밌는글이 올라와있어서 퍼왔습니다. </p><p> </p><p>과게에서도 가끔 올라오는 질문인 </p><p> </p><p>과학을 하려면 수학을 잘해야 하는가!?에 대한 이야기 입니다. </p><p> </p><p>..결론이 없는게 함정이군요. </p>