MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Are there strong results in contemporary mathematical research (last 20 years) which have a proof which every mathematician (holding a PhD) can completely understand within a few days? -- If yes, please give examples. If not, please explain the phenomenon.

share|cite|improve this question
There are some pretty weak PhDs out there, so on those grounds the answer is "no". But if you mean "a good mathematician who is not an expert", then I would say "yes". – Igor Rivin Nov 7 '13 at 13:33
Related:… – Waldemar Nov 7 '13 at 13:41
Already 3 votes to close ? I think this is an interesting soft question, and not an exact duplicate of the question 129759 : there is a difference between a proof understandable by an undergraduate, and a proof understandable by most active mathematicians. The former supposes a low-level proof (in the sense of not using any sophisticated notion: no manifolds, no Lie Groups, no representations, no complex analysis, etc.) which will be in general, as a matter of compensation, quite technical. Here the OP is asking for nice theorems outside of my field that I could understand quickly... – Joël Nov 7 '13 at 14:44
Another problem is that it is not clear to me what a "strong result" is. – Deane Yang Nov 7 '13 at 14:45
Igor, I'm curious about what results you have in mind. – Deane Yang Nov 7 '13 at 14:47

I think "Primes is in P" is accessible to everyone.

share|cite|improve this answer

There are a number of such results in combinatorics. The Wilf–Zeilberger method is perhaps the "strongest" one that I can think of off the top of my head. It is strong by any reasonable definition of the word. With a more precise definition of "strong" I could probably come up with others.

share|cite|improve this answer
Dear Timothy Chow ,I would say a result is strong if it is published in an A journal, cited and some experts in the field would consider the result as strong. Very Best. – Jörg Neunhäuserer Nov 9 '13 at 13:10

Manjul Bhargava's proof of the 15 theorem (in Quadratic Forms and Their Applications, Contemp. Math. 272, 1999) is strikingly simple, especially when contrasted with Conway and Schneeberger's original, intricate proof.

share|cite|improve this answer

My favorite from the last few years is the proof by Hugo Duminil-Copin and Stanislav Smirnov that the connective constant of the honeycomb lattice is $\sqrt{2+\sqrt{2}}$:

share|cite|improve this answer

How about the saturation conjecture? It is a quite strong result, and I believe the proof should be accessible within that time, see

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.