I've indicated before that I personally don't get moved by Gursky's work. But I'll readily admit that I don't believe I could take (or create) a picture that would provoke as many comments on LuLa as this one of his has.
I admit: he has something (besides money) that I don't have.
you have something that Gursky doesn't have: a career as a professor in math and computer science (so it is written on your web site). And exactly the time you invested in this fields Gursky invested in photography (and in addition his father was a successful professional photographer). What would you think, if Gursky would talk about math and computer science?
I don't want to say a mathematician can't take serious photographs. There are many good photographers who actually got their education in another field. But at some point they concentrated on photography. Look at Ansel Adams, he was trained as a piano player, but he quit that for photography.
So make a rough estimate how much more time Gursky spent with photography compared to you.
And don't forget. As a scholar and teacher in an elaborated field you had perhaps more impact on society than Gursky with his images. Make another estimate: How much income did you generate with your research and how much students of yours earn their living because of your work.