Thomas Riepe
|
Registered User
|
|
|
May 16 |
comment |
japanese/chinese for mathematicians? Wonderful - thanks! |
|
May 14 |
awarded | ● Nice Question |
|
May 14 |
revised |
“Modular forms from Feynman integrals ”? added 107 characters in body |
|
May 10 |
awarded | ● Favorite Question |
|
May 10 |
awarded | ● Good Question |
|
May 10 |
comment |
japanese/chinese for mathematicians? Thanks, Iker! And welcome to MO! |
|
May 2 |
comment |
“Motivic structure on higher homotopy of non-nilpotent spaces” ? @David: Yes, the talk is very good, so one could see it as answer, but I wait until the preprints are free available. @Andy: Thanks! |
|
May 1 |
revised |
“Motivic structure on higher homotopy of non-nilpotent spaces” ? added 87 characters in body |
|
Apr 30 |
comment |
“Motivic structure on higher homotopy of non-nilpotent spaces” ? I took the email adress from the papers on that site too, it did not work. |
|
Apr 30 |
comment |
“Motivic structure on higher homotopy of non-nilpotent spaces” ? The email adress given in his papers (at least in those I looked up) did not work. |
|
Apr 30 |
asked | “Motivic structure on higher homotopy of non-nilpotent spaces” ? |
|
Apr 26 |
comment |
What is about J. v. Neumann’s “continuous geometry”? Yes, I found that too, but it looks to me more like a nice try of an AI system to simulate mathematical on a rhetoric level. |
|
Apr 23 |
awarded | ● Good Question |
|
Apr 19 |
answered | Great mathematics books by pre-modern authors |
|
Apr 19 |
comment |
Great mathematics books by pre-modern authors I never tried to read it. It would be great if you tell us more about what of his themes and sections you find most interesting to read! |
|
Apr 16 |
asked | What is about J. v. Neumann’s “continuous geometry”? |
|
Apr 16 |
revised |
current status of crystalline cohomology? added 284 characters in body |
|
Apr 13 |
awarded | ● Nice Question |
|
Apr 7 |
comment |
Status of Beilinson conjectures? Thanks too, François! |
|
Apr 6 |
comment |
Status of Beilinson conjectures? @Jonathan: I would upvote your comment if you explain it (isn't MO just another such site, specialized on mathematics?). |
|
Apr 6 |
comment |
Status of Beilinson conjectures? By the way, one of the causes of my curiosity is a similar impression as you express: Having noticed the conceptual work on BSD etc. - i.e. "the other side of the special-values-questions" -, I failed to notice similar things the "Beilinson side". |
|
Apr 6 |
comment |
Status of Beilinson conjectures? Thanks, Andreas! |
|
Apr 6 |
comment |
Status of Beilinson conjectures? @Marc and Jonathan: Yes, I had posted the question on facebook, but had so far received no answer (probably because I failed to find some recent survey or article and therefore an answer would be too simple; the question came up for me from random bedside yesterday reading some old article on these conjectures, i.e. the typical sort of things for social network sites. It is then too simple for MO, but the weight of curiosity ...). |
|
Apr 6 |
asked | Status of Beilinson conjectures? |
|
Mar 26 |
revised |
What are “perfectoid spaces”? added 128 characters in body |
|
Mar 21 |
awarded | ● Popular Question |
|
Mar 19 |
revised |
What is inter-universal geometry? added 172 characters in body |
|
Mar 15 |
awarded | ● Notable Question |
|
Mar 15 |
awarded | ● Good Question |
|
Mar 15 |
revised |
Grothendieck’s manuscript on topology added 131 characters in body |
|
Mar 15 |
comment |
Grothendieck’s manuscript on topology Thanks! I had thought that idea is already made real. |
|
Mar 14 |
revised |
Grothendieck’s manuscript on topology added 291 characters in body |
|
Mar 3 |
awarded | ● Nice Question |
|
Mar 3 |
revised |
What’s about “quantum modular forms”? added 237 characters in body |
|
Feb 13 |
comment |
Mathematicians whose works were criticized by contemporaries but became widely accepted later @Margaret Friedland - this may be interesting for Winfried Scharlau or Leila Schneps who work on a Grothendieck bio. |
|
Feb 12 |
comment |
Mathematicians whose works were criticized by contemporaries but became widely accepted later @Jonny Evans and arsmath - I only tell what I perceived. As said, I do not think it is worth the effort to try to analyze that, because the interesting issue is IMO a different one. One cause of a dislike of 'star'-mathematicians by the others just comes from the selfperception of the business: If one thinks, mathematics strives for complicated proofs for special statements, one would find work like Grothendieck's very absurd. And as most mathematicians think, 'the difference' between the people comes from IQ + background knowledge, they may be upset if such causes would not show up. |
|
Feb 12 |
comment |
Mathematicians whose works were criticized by contemporaries but became widely accepted later @Jonny Evans - yes, I had met until ca. the late 1990s some very good mathematicians outside the small algebraic geometry circles who expressed their disregards very strongly. Doubtless this was much more intense in e.g. the 1970s. But that should happen regularily if really new ideas come up whose digestion needs work and time, so the interesting question is what makes the mathematics community to come to terms with that in a reasonable way. |
|
Feb 12 |
comment |
Mathematicians whose works were criticized by contemporaries but became widely accepted later Grothendieck's way of doing algebraic geometry was regarded as nonsense by many mathematicians for a long time. I think that repelling new concepts is not that unusual even in mathematics, but that the interesting issue is that mathematics seems to have an unusual tolerance to endure a long time of insecurity if new ideas may really turn useful? |
|
Jan 23 |
comment |
When and how is it appropriate for an undergraduate to email a professor out of the blue? eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-01/… |
|
Jan 3 |
awarded | ● Popular Question |
|
Nov 26 |
revised |
Questions about analogy between Spec Z and 3-manifolds added 388 characters in body |
