If math is more than proof, we need to better celebrate the rest of it
- ID
- 26470
- Status
- summarized
- Published
- 19 Sep 2026, 2:28 PM
- Fetched
- 21 Sep 2026, 12:28 PM
- Provider
- Hacker News
- Category
- dev-community
- Original URL
- https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2026/09/18/if-math-is-more-than-proof-we-need-to-better-celebrate-the-rest-of-it/
- Source URL
- https://hnrss.org/best
Summary
- Score
- 3.5
- Created
- 21 Sep 2026, 12:32 PM
- Tags
- Audience
- ai-ml-learnersdevelopers
What happened
Grant Sanderson, writing on Terence Tao's blog, argues that as AI can generate proofs without human understanding, mathematics should formally elevate 'motivated explanations'—work that answers 'how would you think of that?'—to the same academic status as novel proofs. He proposes defining and crediting this category of work, distinct from popularization, to reflect what mathematicians actually contribute beyond proof generation.
Why it matters
For AI/ML practitioners, this frames a concrete question about your own work: as AI takes over mechanical generation (code, proofs, text), the valuable human contribution shifts toward motivated explanation—articulating why an approach makes sense. If you're building tools or teaching, invest in the 'how would you think of that' layer rather than competing on raw output. However, this is an opinion piece about academic credit structures with no direct builder action item.
Discussion angle
Does the same argument apply to software—should we start crediting 'motivated explanations' of architecture and design decisions as first-class engineering output, now that AI handles more of the implementation?