'Ubiquity of mathematics both a joy and a curse'

 Author of runaway hits like ‘Fermat’s Last Theorem’ and ‘Code Book’, he is probably the first person who showed even complicated mathematics can be bestsellers. His first book, ‘Fermat’s Last Theorem’ (1997) came soon after British mathematician Andrew Wiles in 1995 solved one of the world’s most challenging problems in mathematics — the proof of the famous conjecture made by the French mathematician Pierre de Fermat in 1637. Singh’s second title ‘The Code Book — The Secret History of Codes and Code Breaking’ (1999) was on cryptology that also led to a successful television programme and a trilogy on BBC radio.
Singh, who got his doctorate in particle physics working at the Emmanuel College, Cambridge University, as well as at CERN, Geneva, was selected as the first recipient of the Leelavati Award, instituted by the International Mathematical Union (IMU) for outstanding contributions to public outreach in mathematics. Singh, who will receive the award at the closing ceremony of the ongoing International Congress of Mathematicians at Hyderabad, spoke to Kalyan Ray of Deccan Herald on the challenges in communicating mathematics to common man. Excerpts:

 You received an award for popularising mathematics. Why did you want to popularise it in the first place? What exciting stories mathematics can offer to a general reader?

I write about mathematics (and science) because I find this subject incredibly interesting and I simply want to encourage others to be equally enthusiastic about everything from prime numbers to black holes. Maths is a particular challenge, because so many people (particularly in Europe) are antagonistic towards mathematics.

There is a concept that every equation you write in a popular science book reduce the number of readers. So didn’t you feel handicap when you first start writing the books on mathematics, that can’t be thought of without equation?

It was Stephen Hawking who revealed that his editor had pressured him to remove equations from his hugely successful ‘A Brief History of Time’. It is true that books full of equations will discourage the general reader, but a book without equations is likely to convey very little serious content, particularly if the book is about maths or physics. The trick is to sprinkle the equations in between exciting and emotional stories, so that readers who are not naturally mathematical are not overwhelmed.

What are challenges you faced in taking mathematics from textbooks to book stalls?

I only pick subjects that have a very good back story, or several very good short stories. It is very important to me that my books are widely read, not because it is more profitable, but because my goal is to interest and inspire as many people as possible, young and old, in Britain and around the world.

You also produced television programmes on mathematics — was it more complicated than writing books?

I enjoyed work in television, and it taught me a great deal about story-telling, drama, tension, plot, pace and clarity of explanation. However, I tend to have passions that are sometimes too arcane for television, and I have come to prefer the freedom that is an author’s privilege.

What kind of reader’s response you received from India?

I return to India regularly and have lectured occasionally at schools, universities and bookshops. I am always impressed by the young people I meet, who seem much more enthusiastic about the beauty and power of mathematics. I think there is a realisation in India that the future depends on developing mathematical ideas, scientific theories and new technologies.

For a writer what’s the most fascinating mathematics story from India?

I have always been entranced by the story of Srinivasa Ramanujan — some readers will already be familiar with the story, and for others I would encourage people to look up this genius, whose brief life was touched by romance and tragedy.

Why mathematicians are less known compared to a physicist or a biologist? There is no face like Stephen Hawking or James Watson or Craig Venter who can be immediately associated with the subject even for a lay-person?

I think the problem is that mathematics underpins almost everything, from computers to the internet, from encryption to our models of global warming, from studying the spread of epidemics to understanding the structure of proteins. In all these cases, the mathematics gets rebranded as computer science, or climatology, or biology and so on. I think the key message is that anybody who wants to study science or technology will benefit from having an appreciation and understanding of mathematics.

Even though the recent economic success in the digital world (IT and communications) has a significant contribution from higher mathematics, that aspect is relatively unknown to people — who do you think is at fault?

The ubiquity of mathematics is both a joy and curse. It means that mathematicians can appreciate its impact in every aspect of life, but everyone else just takes it for granted.