Timeline for Why C*-algebras is not as popular as other areas of pure mathematics? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 3, 2020 at 13:10 | history | closed |
LSpice abx Ben McKay Alex M. David White |
Opinion-based | |
| Apr 30, 2020 at 2:21 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 3, 2020 at 13:17 | |||||
| Apr 30, 2020 at 2:04 | comment | added | LSpice | One thing I haven't seen in the comments so far is that, when you're going to graduate school, you don't really know what you want to do, so don't necessarily fret too much about it. I went to Chicago thinking I wanted to study C* algebras, and I ended up in representation theory. Not a world apart, but not at all the same! | |
| Jan 4, 2020 at 7:47 | vote | accept | Nina Wang | ||
| Jan 4, 2020 at 5:54 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | @EricCanton Allan D and David P are more in the vein of non-self-adjoint operator algebras rather than Cstar algebras per se. Chris S is the only out and out Cstar-algebraist, last time I checked. | |
| Jan 4, 2020 at 5:51 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | @Dave TBF, with all due respect to Matt and Ken (Laurent is really more of an operator theorist than an operator algebraist) if we named every place that had some Cstar algebraists, this comment thread would triple in length and still not shed that much light on the (in)correctness of the OP's question, because these things are relative. | |
| Jan 4, 2020 at 5:05 | comment | added | Eric Canton | In addition to the already mentioned schools, the University of Nebraska has at least 3 professors working in $C^*$-algebras, including a new hire: Chris Schaffhauser, who did a postdoc at Waterloo. UNL also has an active group of graduate students who hold learning seminars. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 23:42 | comment | added | Dave | I'll throw in a plug for the University of Waterloo in Canada. I'm a master's student there right now in the pure math department, and there seems to be a lot of interest in $C^*$-algebras. I believe there is a course offered every other year on this topic. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 21:52 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by S. Carnahan♦ | ||
| Jan 3, 2020 at 20:09 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jan 3, 2020 at 16:40 | comment | added | AHusain | There's Vanderbilt since Jones went there. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 16:08 | comment | added | Nik Weaver | @YemonChoi: But I don't think Marc is very active. I looked at the department website and did see a couple of postdocs in the area, though. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 16:07 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | @NikWeaver Well I'd forgotten about Marc Rieffel, tbf, but yes time has done its thing... | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 16:03 | comment | added | Nik Weaver | @YemonChoi: "at Berkeley aren't they down to Voiculescu and Jones as emeritus" --- I hadn't realized that. Kind of depressing. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 15:56 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | @UlrichPennig I think (but have not really tested this theory against the evidence) that because of the tenure system in North America the Elliott-Toms-Winter-fueled resurgence has been slower to translate into new hires than in Germany, Scotland or Wales (also waves to Xin at QMUL). She is correct to note that at MIT, Stanford, Harvard op alg is not a thing; while at Berkeley aren't they down to Voiculescu and Jones as emeritus? | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 15:53 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | I think that the OP (understandably, we've all been there, we all still do it from time to time) errs by extrapolating or using an implicit universal quantifier when these things vary from country to country and generation to generation. There is also the need to remember these things are relative; Cstar algebras might not be as "popular" as X but they are a lot more popular than Y or Z | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 15:35 | comment | added | Nik Weaver | @lcv: my impression is that the connection to physics has faded as a motivation (though there is certainly still good work being done in that direction). But C*-algebra has grown dramatically since the '60s, with Fields Medal level work being done establishing connections with other mathematical areas. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 14:50 | answer | added | Nik Weaver | timeline score: 24 | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 13:25 | comment | added | Ulrich Pennig | The above is of course by no means meant to be a complete list. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 13:21 | comment | added | Ulrich Pennig | I think the OP's impression is indeed wrong. There are several groups worldwide working on operator algebras with a focus on C*-algebras: in Germany for example there is a big group in Münster and there are groups in Göttingen and in Erlangen (the latter with a focus on representation theory and on topological insulators). In the UK there is Oxford, which recently hired a professor working in the classification programme of nuclear simple C*-algebras, Glasgow has a big group in operator algebras. The Newton Institute at Cambridge had a whole programme on operator algebras in 2017. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 12:41 | comment | added | lcv | I would be interested to know if there is any truth in the OP's impression. As a quantum physicist I always thought C* algebras are an important part of modern math and even more so in the '30s- up until probably '50s-'60s. Am I wrong? | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 12:24 | comment | added | MaoWao | Both UCLA and UC Berkeley have strong groups working on operator algebras and related topics. And there is this practical site that allows you to search for operator algebraists: operatoralgebras.org/directory.html In general, I think your comparison with other fields is off - number theory or algebraic geometry are just much broader than $C^\ast$-algebras. | |
| Jan 3, 2020 at 12:10 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 3, 2020 at 13:05 | |||||
| Jan 3, 2020 at 12:05 | history | asked | Nina Wang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |