It is often said that Poincare was the last universalist, i.e. the last mathematician who understood more-or-less all mathematics of his time. But Hilbert's knowledge of math was also quite universal, and he came slightly after Poincare. So why was Hilbert not the last universalist? What branch of math he didn't understood sufficiently well to deserve this title?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Featured I Why is Hilbert not the last universalist?

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - Hilbert last universalist | Date |
---|---|

A Cubic quartets? | Feb 15, 2018 |

Hilbert Hotel Question | Aug 14, 2015 |

Constructability of Roots (esp w/Hilbert Tools) | Dec 13, 2014 |

Hilbert's grand hotel as infinite number of pairs | Jan 20, 2014 |

On the domain of the function that undergoes the Hilbert transform | Oct 30, 2012 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**