Frivolous theorem of arithmetic on Wikipedia

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the "Frivolous Theorem of Arithmetic" as presented on Wikipedia, specifically debating its relevance and whether it should be deleted from the site. Participants explore the implications of labeling the theorem as "useless" and discuss the criteria for what constitutes a valuable theorem in mathematics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the theorem should be deleted from Wikipedia due to its perceived lack of usefulness.
  • Others suggest that if the theorem is true, it should be included regardless of its trivial nature.
  • There is a proposal to categorize the theorem under a "joke-section" rather than deleting it entirely.
  • Some participants challenge the subjectivity of "usefulness" in mathematics, asserting that all true statements have value.
  • A few participants express that the current Wikipedia entry fails to provide meaningful information about the theorem, questioning its significance and clarity.
  • One participant mentions the theorem as a humorous reminder of the limitations of finite computations.
  • There are discussions about the definitions used in the theorem, with some participants suggesting they are overly simplistic.
  • Several participants propose that the page could be improved with more precise statements and explanations of the theorem's implications.
  • One participant introduces the idea of a nonstandard model interpretation of the theorem, discussing the concept of "external" natural numbers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the theorem should be deleted or retained. Multiple competing views are presented regarding the value and significance of the theorem, as well as the adequacy of the current Wikipedia entry.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include a lack of clarity on what constitutes a "real theorem" and the subjective nature of usefulness in mathematics. There are also unresolved questions about the definitions and implications of the theorem itself.

  • #31
Icebreaker said:
Are you implying that the theorem is not useful?

No, I think the page is not useful. It could probably be made useful by adding more content. But all it has right now is filler. For example, the "one of the more interesting theorems of mathematics" comment could be replaced by text that actually explains why the theorem is supposed to be interesting.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Yeah yeah I know, some times I take things too seriously, I've edited the front page, please edit anything I've wrote if you can think of something better.
 
  • #33
I remember it being proven by someone "jokingly" a while back on one of the threads. That proof is much more simple, iirc.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
908