Is there a universal math database for precise definitions and theorems?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Noxide
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Base Data Universal
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

There is no universal math database that provides precise definitions and theorems agreed upon by all mathematicians. Variations in wording exist across different authors, but the underlying meanings of theorems and definitions remain consistent. Users are encouraged to explore various sources to find the wording that resonates best with them. Ultimately, while discrepancies in language may arise, the core concepts remain intact across different texts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mathematical terminology and notation
  • Familiarity with various mathematical texts and authors
  • Basic knowledge of theorem and definition structures
  • Ability to compare and contrast different mathematical sources
NEXT STEPS
  • Research reputable mathematical databases such as MathSciNet and Zentralblatt MATH
  • Explore the differences in mathematical terminology across various textbooks
  • Investigate the role of peer-reviewed journals in standardizing mathematical definitions
  • Learn about the importance of context in interpreting mathematical theorems
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, educators, students, and researchers seeking clarity in mathematical definitions and theorems will benefit from this discussion.

Noxide
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
Does there exist a database with very specific mathematical definitions, theorems... etc? I've found that some thm's/dfn etc differ from author to author. Not necessarily in meaning, but in the words used to describe them. Is there a place where a precise definition can be found that is agreed upon by all mathematicians?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
There are no universally agreed ways to word specific theorems or definitions. However, discounting typos (and occasionally wikipedia!) you can be pretty certain that any two wordings of the same theorem/definition in print mean essentially the same thing. I suggest trying different sources until you find one that you are most comfortable with, and then referring to that.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad How deep does it need to go for a physics theory to be consistent?
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
High School Cartesian Space vs. Euclidean Space
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Graduate Shinichi Mochizuki's ABC Conjecture and Replication Crisis in Maths
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K
Graduate Is Mathematics a Belief System?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
Graduate The Blessings of Dimensionality and Hilbert's 6th Problem
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Can the "measurement problem" just be an "epistemological ambiguity"?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Reactor Performance/Design As A Political Ideology
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Undergrad The far reaching ramifications of the work-energy theorem
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
Studying Is There a Fundamental Difference Between Proof-Based Math and Applied Physics?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Graduate How Much More Knowledge Does a Mathematician Have Than a Math Graduate?
  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
22K