That may well have been the liveliest conversation yet. Also the least summarizable. Never mind--here goes!

Diners were Judith Arms, Ken Bube, Dave Collingwood, Neal Koblitz, Doug Lind and Ginger Warfield (faculty), Brian Hopkins, Michael Keynes and Robbie Mouat (graduate students) and Howard Anderson, PFF administrator/coordinator/evaluator/observer/visitor. Of these, seven were local, and seven coming more or less straight from an open meeting on the graduate program in the math department. Not the same seven.That, at any rate, set the tenor for a fair number of the chunks of conversation. An initial question was what we should do about the current round of appalling prognoses about the oversupplies of Math PhD's being pumped into an unreceptive job scene. Should we feel guilty admitting as many graduate students as we do with the knowledge that a lot of them will be spending a lot of energy battling a bleak job market at the end of their graduate careers? To me the most comforting comment on that front was Michael's remark that he had been canvassing his peers and it seemed to him that most shared his line of priorities: they are in the math graduate program because they like math. I think we should make every effort in every direction so far suggested and with luck a few not yet thought of, but I think keeping that image of our students in mind might improve our morale while doing so!

Meanwhile, what can we do? There's the possibility of making connections around the campus--maybe even having some inter-departmental graduate programs. This led us into all sorts of speculation about the plausibility of actually establishing communication across the gulfs that separate us from our most closely connected colleagues. Do we speak the same language? Do we mean the same thing when we say we have solved a problem? (Ken spoke feelingly to the negative on that one!) On the other hand, is it worth at least throwing a few rope bridges across the gaps? Absolutely. It would seem an excellent idea to invite some speakers in to give us some notion of what goes on elsewhere on campus. Judith suggested Loveday Conquest--she seems to fill the bill nicely. Clearly others would, too.

And, on the subject of speakers, one idea that we had at the very beginning stages of PFF but that got buried in all the other activity was that of inviting in some of our earlier PhDs and having them talk about their careers. The ideal level seems to be those that are a few, but not many, years out. That's the bunch that will have had time to get things in focus, but will be talking about a world that is at least recognizably related to the one into which current graduate students will emerge.

And yet more on the subject of speakers--an idea that has shuttled between front and back burner for about a year now is to have a small panel of members of the department tell the mathematical portions of their life stories. I'm not sure anybody could be on a panel with Dave, though--a mathematical career founded on a broken ankle is a very hard act to follow!

Any of the three types of speakers would do nicely for a graduate student colloquium, but there was a pretty strong sense on the former two that it would be even better to have them as a regular departmental colloquium.

Sustainability of PFF type activities came up for discussion. Howard mentioned that various departments here and elsewhere are setting up a program under which students would take part in a seminar and an internship program and get credits for it. Brian and Michael were both skeptical of that format for us except possibly for a thin margin of time in mid-graduate career. First year students are too much submerged in course work to take it on (strong vibrations of silent agreement from Robbie) and advanced students can always fill their credit allotment with thesis work in one form or another. That leaves about a two quarter interim--a little slim. What we are actually hoping to do, in any case, is continue the current format of splitting two Study Center jobs three ways so that three students get one third time each to go and visit SU or SCCC( or possibly somewhere else in the future.) It seems to be working pretty well. Chances of continuing it might be particularly enhanced if we can make the appropriate hopeful noises to the Graduate School, which just received a $500,000 endowment that it intends to spend on matters of PFFish ilk.

I am reasonably certain that there remain huge slabs of conversation lurking about in unrecorded corners. On the other hand, a half an hour of brain cudgeling has so far produced only wispy fragments. I think I had better quit before I suffer a bruised brain. If any of you can point a flashlight at one of the slabs I will cheerfully append a postscript. Otherwise, this is The Summary.