Timeline for What great mathematics are we missing out on because of language barriers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2010 at 13:46 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | At reputation level 15, one must first provide an answer, and then one can comment on that answer only. Even so, I believe that the questions I provided will help in answering your questions. In particular, the name-use confusion that often arises in metamathematics (e.g. the Skolem and other paradoxes) I think may be more pronounced in some languages than others. I wish you luck in finding the examples you desire. Gerhard "Ask Me About System Design" Paseman, 2010.04.12 | |
| Apr 12, 2010 at 10:53 | comment | added | cheater | At most a comment - a welcome and revealing one (thanks!), but not an answer: it does not contain mentions of any specific objects, or theorems, or theories, by specific mathematicians. The question is about results (specific theorems you can quote here) that are not known broadly in the English language space because they have not been translated to English. It is very much a question about mathematical objects, only one minor qualifier is socio-linguistic ('was not translated to English'). The more important qualifier is that what is brought up needs to be an 'interesting' result in maths. | |
| Apr 12, 2010 at 5:49 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | At least I stopped short of claiming that Eskimos had 57 words for snow. I am willing to hear an Eskimo (or material dynamicist) comment on the desirability of having that many words for snow. Gerhard "Missed It By That Much" Paseman, 2010.04.11 | |
| Apr 12, 2010 at 5:12 | comment | added | S. Carnahan♦ | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eskimo_words_for_snow | |
| Apr 12, 2010 at 1:08 | history | answered | Gerhard Paseman | CC BY-SA 2.5 |