Skip to main content
MathOverflow

Return to Question

made title less biased (Bourbaki didn't ignore categories, but didn't incorporate them in their books)
Link
YCor
YCor
  • 63.9k
  • 5
  • 187
  • 286

Why did Bourbaki ignoreBourbaki's Élements omit the theory of categories?

Post Reopened by Francois Ziegler, paul garrett, Carlo Beenakker, Fred Rohrer, Emil Jeřábek
edited tags
Link
Francois Ziegler
Francois Ziegler
  • 31.5k
  • 6
  • 121
  • 176
Post Made Community Wiki by Todd Trimble
cosmetic
Source Link
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
  • 7.5k
  • 1
  • 35
  • 51

QUESTION

They had plenty of time to adopt the theory of categories. They had Eilenberg, then Cartan, then Grothendieck. Did they feel that they have established their approach already, that it's too late to go back and start anew?

I have my very-very general answer: World is Chaos, Mathematics is a Jungle, Bourbaki was a nice fluke, but no fluke can last forever, no fluke can overtake Chaos and Jungle. I'd still like to have a much more complete picture.

Appendix: CHRONOLOGY

  • 1934:   Bourbaki's birth (approximate date);
  • 1942-45:   Samuel Eilenberg & Saunders Mac Lane - functor, natural transformation, $K(\pi,n)$;
  • 1946 & 1952: S.Eilenberg & Norman E. Steenrod publish "Axiomatic..." & "Foundations...";
  • 1956: Henri Cartan & S.Eilenberg publish "Homological Algebra";
  • 1957: Alexander Grothendieck publishes his "Tohoku paper", abelian category.


(*Feel*Please, feel free to add the relevant most important dates to the list above*).

QUESTION

They had plenty of time to adopt the theory of categories. They had Eilenberg, then Cartan, then Grothendieck. Did they feel that they have established their approach already, that it's too late to go back and start anew?

I have my very-very general answer: World is Chaos, Mathematics is a Jungle, Bourbaki was a nice fluke, but no fluke can last forever, no fluke can overtake Chaos and Jungle. I'd still like to have a much more complete picture.

Appendix: CHRONOLOGY

  • 1934:   Bourbaki's birth (approximate date);
  • 1942-45:   Samuel Eilenberg & Saunders Mac Lane - functor, natural transformation, $K(\pi,n)$;
  • 1946 & 1952: S.Eilenberg & Norman E. Steenrod publish "Axiomatic..." & "Foundations...";
  • 1956: Henri Cartan & S.Eilenberg publish "Homological Algebra";
  • 1957: Alexander Grothendieck publishes his "Tohoku paper", abelian category.


(*Feel free to add the relevant most important dates to the list above*).

QUESTION

They had plenty of time to adopt the theory of categories. They had Eilenberg, then Cartan, then Grothendieck. Did they feel that they have established their approach already, that it's too late to go back and start anew?

I have my very-very general answer: World is Chaos, Mathematics is a Jungle, Bourbaki was a nice fluke, but no fluke can last forever, no fluke can overtake Chaos and Jungle. I'd still like to have a much more complete picture.

Appendix: CHRONOLOGY

  • 1934:   Bourbaki's birth (approximate date);
  • 1942-45:   Samuel Eilenberg & Saunders Mac Lane - functor, natural transformation, $K(\pi,n)$;
  • 1946 & 1952: S.Eilenberg & Norman E. Steenrod publish "Axiomatic..." & "Foundations...";
  • 1956: Henri Cartan & S.Eilenberg publish "Homological Algebra";
  • 1957: Alexander Grothendieck publishes his "Tohoku paper", abelian category.


(*Please, feel free to add the relevant most important dates to the list above*).

Post Closed as "not constructive" by Theo Johnson-Freyd, David White, Alain Valette, Qiaochu Yuan, user6976
an invitation
Source Link
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
  • 7.5k
  • 1
  • 35
  • 51
Chronology
Source Link
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
  • 7.5k
  • 1
  • 35
  • 51
Correct tense
Link
Ryan Reich
Ryan Reich
  • 7.3k
  • 4
  • 37
  • 53
Source Link
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
Włodzimierz Holsztyński
  • 7.5k
  • 1
  • 35
  • 51