Development of Math Subjects

  • Thread starter dijkarte
  • Start date
  • #1
184
0

Main Question or Discussion Point

Since when each of the following math branches stopped developing, so there have been no new established theories and topics added?

Abstract algebra

Set theory

Probability and statistics

Differential equations

Calculus and analysis

Fourier analysis
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
1,765
124
Those haven't stopped developing at all, except maybe set theory. Set theory isn't very active. I'm not sure exactly when that happened.
 
  • #3
184
0
Could you please give me an example where a new theory/method has been added since the past 10 year for one area? And I don't mean advanced/research active topics...
Maybe my questions was not clear. What I want to know if anything changed with new theories that replaced old ones, generalization, ...etc.
 
  • #4
22,097
3,283
Those haven't stopped developing at all, except maybe set theory. Set theory isn't very active. I'm not sure exactly when that happened.
Uuuhm, set theory is still very active... It might not be as popular, but there is still quite some research in it.
 
  • #5
  • #6
184
0
Yup they are active research areas, but do they rule out any theories we studied 10 years ago? In other words, if I'm studying from a math book dated in 60s, am I studying something outdated and invalid?
Are these research topics taught and listed in undergraduate syllabus?
 
  • #7
Yup they are active research areas, but do they rule out any theories we studied 10 years ago? In other words, if I'm studying from a math book dated in 60s, am I studying something outdated and invalid?
Is that even possible? As I understand it, mathematics is built up successively using deductive arguments that must necessarily be true. I freely admit that I don't know, but it wouldn't make sense to me if a "proof" were suddenly found to be incorrect.
 
  • #8
184
0
I freely admit that I don't know, but it wouldn't make sense to me if a "proof" were suddenly found to be incorrect.
Exactly that's what I mean, whether recent researches ruled out any previous theories, and then courses and texts have to be updated accordingly.

I know everything is an active research area and can develop, and not only applicable to math.

But let me reword my question a bit.

If I'm studying ODEs from a text that dates back to 1960s, and another student is studying the same subject ODEs from a different new text say 2011. And both are studying at the same level, say undergraduate. How this person knowledge will be different than mine in this subject?
 
  • #9
22,097
3,283
Exactly that's what I mean, whether recent researches ruled out any previous theories, and then courses and texts have to be updated accordingly.

I know everything is an active research area and can develop, and not only applicable to math.

But let me reword my question a bit.

If I'm studying ODEs from a text that dates back to 1960s, and another student is studying the same subject ODEs from a different new text say 2011. And both are studying at the same level, say undergraduate. How this person knowledge will be different than mine in this subject?
It all depends on the topic at hand, but I don't think your knowledge will be very different. The texts will be different however, but this won't matter much.

My experience is actually that older texts are actually better (not always of course). Old texts usually care only about rigor. New texts are often dumbed down.

Here are a random example of 5 texts that I have:

Spivak - Calculus: 1967
Kelley - Topology: 1955
Rudin - Principles of mathematical analysis - 1953
Artin - Algebra - 1991
Arnold - Ordinary differential equations - 1978

These texts are all considered top notch and they are all (with maybe the exception of Artin) quite old.

The quality of a text has very little to do with how old the text is. Old texts can be good, or they can be bad. So don't look at the age very much when choosing a text.

Sometimes, you do need newer texts however. For example, if you want material on recently discovered things. But at undergraduate level, or beginning graduate level, this won't be an issue.
 
  • #10
806
23
In other words, if I'm studying from a math book dated in 60s, am I studying something outdated and invalid?
Mathematics is a deductive science. Everything that was true 60 years ago is still true today.
 
  • #11
1,765
124
Uuuhm, set theory is still very active... It might not be as popular, but there is still quite some research in it.
Okay, but it is a fairly small area, I would say. I don't know of any math professors who work on set theory, but then, I'm fairly out of touch with that stuff.
 

Related Threads on Development of Math Subjects

  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
243
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Top