Timeline for Are students majoring in pure mathematics expected to know classical results in mathematics very well by their graduation?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 8, 2019 at 6:21 | comment | added | Daniel R. Collins | @BenCrowell: Aside from the "classical", I don't think that philosophizing or attempts at the parallel postulate would count as "results" for the purposes of this question. | |
| Feb 8, 2019 at 4:56 | comment | added | user507 | I suspect that different people would disagree on the classicalness of various results. Yep. Is "classical" even a good thing? In 1750, "classical" mathematics might have included topics like woolly philosophizing on the nature of the continuum, or attempts to prove the parallel postulate. Today we would consider those to have been dead ends. I took the required undergrad course in fields and Galois theory, and my impression was that Galois theory was of zero importance except historically. Not true? The text and the professor never tried to convince me otherwise. | |
| Jan 21, 2019 at 20:19 | history | answered | Tommi | CC BY-SA 4.0 |