Timeline for Meaning of Kronecker's comment to Lindemann
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2017 at 12:05 | comment | added | Takahiro Waki | Beside, even his proof of Galois theory diffinitely include irrational number. | |
| Aug 4, 2010 at 3:27 | history | edited | John Stillwell | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 275 characters in body
|
| Aug 4, 2010 at 1:15 | comment | added | John Stillwell | In fact, Brouwer probably used methods (in his proofs of the Brouwer fixed point theorem, invariance of dimension etc.) that he had already opposed in his 1907 thesis. There is a theory that Brouwer did his work in topology to gain reputation, so that he would have a platform from which to launch his intuitionist views. In Kronecker's case, I think it more likely that he developed his finitist views later in life, but I'm not convinced that he held them consistently. | |
| Aug 4, 2010 at 1:05 | history | edited | John Stillwell | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
Corrected reference
|
| Aug 4, 2010 at 0:48 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Isn't it also the case that Brouwer used methods in his early work that he would reject later in life. | |
| Aug 3, 2010 at 23:54 | history | answered | John Stillwell | CC BY-SA 2.5 |