Timeline for What is the first interesting theorem in (insert subject here)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 25, 2009 at 5:52 | comment | added | Harrison Brown | Maybe it's more correct to say that Yoneda is the last trivial theorem? | |
| Oct 25, 2009 at 2:03 | comment | added | GMRA | I agree with Anton and Harrison. It really isn't that much of a theorem (to prove that is) but understanding all consequences is non-trivial. Same goes for Schur's lemma, which is absolutely trivial to proof, but fundamental to the subject. | |
| Oct 24, 2009 at 21:28 | comment | added | Harrison Brown | I think Anton said what I wanted to get across: the Yoneda lemma itself isn't non-trivial, but the philosophy of it is. | |
| Oct 24, 2009 at 20:56 | comment | added | Anton Geraschenko | Though Yoneda's lemma isn't non-trivial, I feel like understanding its significance is definitely a non-trivial step. Schur's lemma in representation theory and Nakayama's lemma in algebra have a similar feel to them. They're pretty trivial to prove, but can take a while to really grok them. | |
| Oct 24, 2009 at 20:48 | comment | added | Ilya Nikokoshev | I think I'm only now getting where you're going. You want the first result after all the basic tools have been introduced? | |
| Oct 24, 2009 at 20:36 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | I thought about that, but I think category theorists would consider the Yoneda lemma trivial. Not to say that it's easy to understand, but it does follow directly from the category axioms. | |
| Oct 24, 2009 at 20:30 | history | answered | Harrison Brown | CC BY-SA 2.5 |