6 ms·
There’s a big long list of these in https://web.math.princeton.edu/generals/ https://web.math.princeton.edu/generals/, not just Tao’s.
by ajtulloch 3y ago
There’s a big long list of these in https://web.math.princeton.edu/generals/ https://web.math.princeton.edu/generals/, not just Tao’s.
- krackers 3y agoBhargava's one is fun to read: https://web.math.princeton.edu/generals/bhargava_manjul https://web.math.princeton.edu/generals/bhargava_manjul
- zach 3y agoI noticed that Evan O’Dorney’s generals was chaired by Bhargava and this question was asked: What is Brauer's theorem? [I had no idea and they moved on] He clearly should have read Bhargava’s generals, where Andrew Wiles asks Bhargava the same question!
- xdavidliu 3y agoI don't like that question because it asks for recollection of a name, as opposed to taking the theorem "when X is true, then Y is true" and changing the question into the form "when X is true, ____???". Worst case I've seen of this was when I was in 9th grade and our geometry teacher required us to memorize the chapter and section names of theorems in the book when proving. For example, in our proofs about triangles, we had to write "theorem 12.5" or else we wouldn't get credit on the test, and here 12.5 was the chapter and section number in the particular textbook, which is an utterly useless piece of info. Of course, the name Brauer is not nearly as useless as a chapter name, but still being familiar with math history probably shouldn't be hard requirement for being a professional mathematician.
- zem 3y agothat was a very entertaining one!
- The_suffocated 3y agoI think his generals are easier than Tao's. I wonder how many "average" PhD candidates worldwide can answer the questions in Tao's generals satisfactorily without difficulties. Many of them just seem highly research-oriented.
- adharmad 3y agoQuite a few future field medalists in that list. The collective math IQ of the group is off the charts!