Carnival of Mathematics Research?

Over at Michi’s blog and John Armstrong’s place, there’s lately been some discussion of starting a new carnival devoted to higher-level mathematics. John Armstrong summarizes his view thusly:

The Carnival of Mathematics has become a de facto carnival of lower-level mathematics, brainteasers, and mathematics education. And I’m fine with that. I’m leaning towards letting it be and just starting a new carnival for actual mathematics. There are certainly many more mathematics weblogs than there were when CoM began, and they could support at least a monthly carnival on their own now. Or maybe this more academic community is inclined to disdain the carnival approach entirely.

Other people have suggested that there’s something to be gained by mixing the levels, and while I agree that something could be gained, I don’t think anything is being gained. People coming from the lower-level and dilettantish weblogs are not reading the higher-level material. And higher-level people can still read the Carnival posts and find what’s new in sudoku-land if they want, whether high-level blatherers submit to CoM or not.

Alon Levy suggests that the composition of the CoM could be changed by a host soliciting posts from a different set of blog- um, blatherers. I wonder if this could be sustained over multiple editions.

Head on over and discuss!

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

3 Responses to “Carnival of Mathematics Research?”

  1. I don’t think separating the carnival into (effectively) math education and math research is a particularly good idea. Much better to have a carnival with a wide range of material. If nothing else, I suspect it would make it easier for people at a lower level to make the transition to higher levels. Maybe the people from “lower level” blogs who read the high level stuff are a minority, but there’s not reason to isolate them.

    I’m also not much convinced by the traffic arguments. SBSeminar seems to get steady traffic from Carnival links. Said traffic can be completely swamped by the occasional link from Peter Woit, but it’s wrong to call it nothing.

    A.J. said this on August 26th, 2007 at 21:44 pm

  2. I wasn’t terribly concerned by the traffic issue: we all know that the surest way to get a traffic boost is to get linked from Pharyngula. Heck, I’ve gotten noticeable spikes when PZ Myers links to a blog which links to me! Logically, then, we need to write more about biomathematics and the application of n-categories to natural selection.

    My biggest concern is actually a point which John Armstrong raised but nobody else seemed to talk about. People who volunteer to host the CoM because they like recreational mathematics or have an interest in K-12 math education probably won’t have the technical background necessary to understand, summarize and organize posts on more advanced topics. This could really throw a Spaniard in the works for people who are trying to make that transition beyond Sudoku.

    Blake Stacey said this on August 27th, 2007 at 11:13 am

  3. […] readers are circulating this site, I thought it might be a good time to resurrect a slightly old discussion on the place of research in the mathematics carnival. Some people seem to think research […]

    Carnivale! « Secret Blogging Seminar said this on August 27th, 2007 at 16:30 pm