The discussion centers on the formulation of new open problems in mathematics, emphasizing that while anyone, including master's and doctoral students, can create such problems, the ability to identify and solve interesting, publishable problems typically requires a deeper understanding of the research area. Experienced mathematicians are more adept at recognizing unsolved problems and knowing where to focus their efforts. The conversation highlights that new problems often emerge naturally during research, rather than being artificially created in meetings.
PREREQUISITESMathematics students, researchers, and educators interested in formulating new open problems and understanding the dynamics of mathematical research.
What do you think? That there are periodical meetings where professors sit together and create unsolved problems? These problems arise naturally by doing research as one will always find new unanswered questions. The level of education can only help to know whether they are really unsolved or who is working in the area and most important: where to look for. Research is to a great extend done in libraries. And usually it's not about ground breaking new insights, but often small improvements on known stuff: another boundary for remainder terms, better estimations on complexity, another class of nilpotent groups and things like that. Unless you don't work in the field, you will rarely meet the Goldbach conjecture, and certainly not "invent" one.flamengo said:I have a question about mathematics at the research level. How difficult is it to formulate new open problems in mathematics? For example, can a master's student create such problems? And a doctoral student? Or are only experienced mathematicians able to do this? Does this depend on the research area? Could someone give me a detailed answer?