bhopballooo

Thanks!

I should have written, 'They also demonstrate that such motivation cannot be adjusted at whim.'

Good point and it's not cut and dried but the character of his output had changed to the extent that it was not published in technical journals as it had been:

>Relatively little of his work after 1960 was published by the conventional route of the learned journal, circulating initially in duplicated volumes of seminar notes; his influence was to a considerable extent personal. His influence spilled over into many other branches of mathematics, for example the contemporary theory of D-modules. (It also provoked adverse reactions, with many mathematicians seeking out more concrete areas and problems.)

My guess would be that he was working on himself rather than on the mathematics. Mathematics was merely the means and the medium. But I haven't read the material...!

Stories like these suggest to me that genius level creativity equals intrinsic motivation plus time.

They also demonstrate that such motivation cannot be adjusted at will. It amounts to one's deepest understanding of where personal progress or best direction lies. Thus when Grothendieck or Swedenborg had religious experiences later in life their technical output ceased because their motivations had changed irrevocably.

Is it a simple case of pain-free joints enabling one to exercise more?