努力工作

Terence Tao 2007-05-06

努力工作

每一位名副其实的数学家都曾体验过……那种清醒的兴奋状态,在这种状态下,思绪仿佛奇迹般地一个接一个涌现……这种感觉可能会持续数小时,甚至数天。一旦你体验过它,你就渴望重复它,但却无法随心所欲地做到,除非也许是通过不懈的努力…… (安德烈·韦伊,“数学家的学徒生涯”)

单靠智力在最后一刻完成任务可能会奏效一段时间,但一般来说,在研究生或更高的阶段就行不通了。

为了在数学上取得任何严肃的进展,一个人需要进行大量的阅读和写作,而不仅仅是思考;与公众的看法相反,数学突破并非仅仅(甚至主要)由天才的“尤里卡”时刻驱动,而实际上在很大程度上是努力工作的产物,当然还要辅以经验和直觉的指导。(另请参阅“天才崇拜”)。

魔鬼往往藏在细节中;如果你认为你理解了一段数学内容,你应该能够通过阅读所有相关的文献,并至少写下这段数学内容如何进行的草图来证明这一点,最终写出一份关于该主题的完整而详细的处理。(另请参阅“学习和重新学习你的领域”)。如果一个人可以只是梦想宏大的想法,而让一些“次等凡人”去填充细节,那将是非常愉快的事情,但是,相信我,在数学中根本不是这样运作的;过去的经验表明,只值得将时间和注意力投入到那些已经仔细收集了大量细节和其他支持证据(或至少是一个“概念证明”)以支持其“宏大想法”的论文中。如果想法的提出者不愿意这样做,那么很可能没有其他人会这样做。

简而言之,数学没有皇家大道;要达到“ 后严谨 ”的阶段,即你的直觉与可以严格确立的内容很好地匹配,你必须首先投入真正的努力来学习和重新学习该领域,了解工具的优势弱点了解数学界正在发生的其他事情,学习如何严格地解决问题,以及回答大量愚蠢的问题,等等。这一切都需要努力工作。

当然,要努力工作,如果你热爱你的工作,那会非常有帮助。将你的努力导向富有成效的方向而不是徒劳的方向也很重要;特别是,花一些时间提前思考,并且不要痴迷于一个单一的“大问题”或“大理论”

当然,有时你会因为过于沮丧、疲惫或缺乏动力而无法继续当前的项目的时期。这完全正常,强迫自己继续那个项目一段时间后可能会适得其反。我发现,当我因为任何原因不愿意从事我的主要项目时,手头有一些较小的项目(或者也许是一些非数学的杂事)会有所帮助;反过来,如果我对这些较小的任务感到厌倦,我通常可以说服自己去处理我的一个更大的项目。另请参阅我关于时间管理的想法

也有一些时候,你会意识到一个项目在目前简单来说处理起来太困难了,那么修改项目的目标,或者搁置它并转而研究另一个项目是明智的选择:请参阅“保持灵活性”和“使用废纸篓”。

最后一点:在“努力工作”和“最大化工作小时数”之间存在着重要的区别。特别是,强迫自己在疲倦、缺乏动力、准备不足或被其他任务分散注意力时工作,最终可能会对你的长期工作效率产生反作用,并且存在一个饱和点,超过这个点,强迫自己工作更长时间实际上会减少你从长远来看完成的总工作量(因为这可能导致额外的疲劳、动力丧失,或处理非工作任务的需求日益紧迫)。总的来说,最好是努力安排一些高质量的工作时间,在这些时间里你有动力、精力充沛、准备充分且没有分心,而不是试图在日程表中塞入大量低质量的工作时间,而上述四个因素中的一个或多个不存在。

另请参阅艾拉·格拉斯的这句引言,关于弥合低质量和高质量创意产出之间差距所需的努力工作。

Work hard

Every mathematician worthy of the name has experienced … the state of lucid exaltation in which one thought succeeds another as if miraculously… this feeling may last for hours at a time, even for days. Once you have experienced it, you are eager to repeat it but unable to do it at will, unless perhaps by dogged work… (André Weil, “The Apprenticeship of a Mathematician”)

Relying on intelligence alone to pull things off at the last minute may work for a while, but, generally speaking, at the graduate level or higher it doesn’t.

One needs to do a serious amount of reading and writing, and not just thinking, in order to get anywhere serious in mathematics; contrary to public opinion, mathematical breakthroughs are not powered solely (or even primarily) by “Eureka” moments of genius, but are in fact largely a product of hard work, directed of course by experience and intuition. (See also “ the cult of genius “.)

The devil is often in the details; if you think you understand a piece of mathematics, you should be able to back that up by having read all the relevant literature and having written down at least a sketch of how that piece of mathematics goes, and then ultimately writing up a complete and detailed treatment of the topic. (See also “ learn and relearn your field “.) It would be very pleasant if one could just dream up the grand ideas and let some “lesser mortals” fill in the details, but, trust me, it doesn’t work like that at all in mathematics; past experience has shown that it is only worth paying one’s time and attention to papers in which a substantial amount of detail and other supporting evidence (or at least a “proof-of-concept”) has already been carefully gathered to support one’s “grand idea”. If the originator of the idea is unwilling to do this, chances are that no-one else will do so either.

In short, there is no royal road to mathematics; to get to the “ post-rigorous ” stage in which your intuition matches well with what one can establish rigorously, one has to first invest real effort in learning and relearning the field, learning the strengths and weaknesses of tools, learning what else is going on in mathematics, learning how to solve problems rigorously, and answering lots of dumb questions, and so forth. This all requires hard work.

Of course, to work hard, it really helps if you enjoy your work. It is also important to direct your effort in a fruitful direction rather than a fruitless one; in particular, spend some time thinking ahead, and don’t obsess on a single “big problem” or “big theory”.

There will of course be times when one is too frustrated, fatigued, or otherwise not motivated to work on one’s current project. This is perfectly normal, and trying to force oneself to keep at that project can become counterproductive after a while. I find that it helps to have a number of smaller projects (or perhaps some non-mathematical errands) to have at hand when I am unwilling for whatever reason to work on my major projects; conversely, if I get bored with these smaller tasks, I can often convince myself to then tackle one of my bigger ones. See also my thoughts on time management.

There are also times when one realises that a project is simply too much to handle at the present time, and it then makes sense to modify one’s goals for the project, or shelve it and work on another project instead: see “ be flexible ” and “ use the wastebasket “.

One final note: there is an important distinction between “working hard” and “maximising the number of hours during which one works”. In particular, forcing oneself to work even when one is tired, unmotivated, unprepared, or distracted with other tasks can end up being counterproductive to one’s long-term work productivity, and there is a saturation point beyond which pushing oneself to work even longer will actually reduce the total amount of work you get done in the long run (due to the additional fatigue, loss of motivation, or increasingly urgent need to attend to non-work tasks that this can cause). Generally speaking, it is better to try to arrange a few hours of high-quality working time, when one is motivated, energetic, prepared, and free from distraction, than to try to cram into one’s schedule a large number of hours of low-quality working time when one or more of the above four factors are not present.

See also this quote of Ira Glass on the hard work needed to bridge the gap between low-quality and high-quality creative output.