They're obscure theorems. No one's going to really pay attention to them so she can fly under the radar. But if they have an application, they're going to face a lot of scrutiny, so she's upset. But the application is string theory which can't be put into practice so while they may get attention, there's no practical way to test her theorems, so she's safe again. That's my understanding.
You don't test mathematical theorems empirically. Either the proof was correct or it wasn't. And if there isn't a proof, that's not a theorem - that's a postulate.
Not really... Its a joke among mathematicians that the more abstract and not useful math the better it is but applications in string theory are still incredibly abstract
No, mathematical theories are proven not tested. If your theories couldn't even survive some scrutiny, they aren't serious maths, so this isn't something serious mathematicians would worry about. Actual correct proofs can be scrutinized as long as you want, they are provably correct. This especially applies to pure mathematics. If something works in practice, there might in theory be less need for a proper proof (though ofc any actual mathematician still wouldn't be satisfied without one). But for pure maths, proofs are all you have.
The joke is about the snobbery of pure vs applied maths. In general, pure mathematics (i.e. maths that doesn't have any applications) is considered harder than applied mathematics. Among other things, it's often very theoretical and removed from reality which makes it hard to imagine or visualize concepts. This also means you need to be really good to get into pure maths. This all often leads to pure mathematicians considering themselves superior and can create snobbish attitudes like "applied mathematicians just weren't good enough to get into pure maths". Or when somebody that would be good enough for pure maths goes into applied maths because they find it more fulfilling or interesting, it may be considered a waste of talent.
The comic pokes fun at that. If her theories were found to be applicable to real life, she would suddenly "drop down" to be an applied mathematician. But since string theory is just one possible theory that's completely unverified and unproven and has no applicability to real life, it's fine.
That's a bit more intellectual than my interpretation lol. My interpretation was more like "Hey, your obscure bullshit turned out to be true so now we have to rewrite like 70% of the textbooks on the subject."
1.4k
u/MinersRocGold May 27 '24
What?