7

The algebraic Theory of Invariants used to be a hot topic until David Hilbert proved his two theorems about invariants. Then for tens of years, the popularity of the topic went down a long time before it picked up again.

Question What are today's mathematical known topics and/or notions that are profound but not popular? Together with an example, could you add an explanation of such a situation?

Example from Computer Science -- geometric SIMD (fine grain parallel processing) was a popular and hot topic till the middle of 1980'. Then you hardly hear about it while the idea is as fundamental as always.

The explanation is two-folded but very simple. On the one hand, there is some learning and new understanding involved in geometric SIMD processing; one needs to acquire new habits, new reflexes. On the other hand, the technology progress was such that people were satisfied with the results obtained without bothering with the SIMD ways. (Underneath, the new traditional computer architecture is not that traditional -- these days, it incorporates quite a bit of parallelity). We see that the geometric SIMD is not popular for the wrong reasons, and a lot of potentials is wasted.

Wlod AA
  • 4,686
  • 16
  • 23
  • 4
    Catastrophe theory – Piyush Grover Nov 03 '20 at 23:57
  • 6
    I think that this question is too broad, as well as too subjective and opinion-based. A similar question was asked ten years ago and then closed and deleted, to be replaced by the question Fields of mathematics that were dormant for a long time until someone revitalized them. Related questions asking whether this or that field is dead or dying have been closed. This type of question does not seem to be a good fit for MO. – Timothy Chow Nov 04 '20 at 02:04
  • 2
    @PiyushGrover, Vladimir Arnold used to say that he was doing the singularity theory while he didn't really know (that's what he was saying) what is the Catastrophy Theory. Nevertheless, he meant that the theories are one and the same. – Wlod AA Nov 04 '20 at 02:29
  • For the sake of mathematics and mathematicians, it's important to remind us of useful notions and topics which are overlooked. – Wlod AA Nov 04 '20 at 04:20
  • 2
    Usually if a profound topic is not popular it is because it's new, and people still do not see how profound it is, with the possible exception of the inventor(s), who would to convince the rest of the word of the importance --the best arguments being deeds. So the question "What are today's mathematical known topics and/or notions that are profound but not popular?" seems doomed to remain opinion-based. – Pietro Majer Nov 17 '20 at 16:26

2 Answers2

11

This hasn't yet been revitalized, but I think John von Neumann's work on Continuous Geometry is rather deep, but there really doesn't seem to be much major work on this topic besides what you see in the references in the link above.

Oddly, even though von Neumann was explicitly aiming to de-emphasize the notion of point in geometry via this work, and the axioms for a continuous geometry are quite similar to those of the notion of frame in the theory of locales, when I have read about locales I have never seen von Neumann's work referred to as a precursor to the theory. (Of course frames only require finite meets.) I'm surprised about this since undoubtedly Marshall Stone was involved with the prehistory of locale theory as is reflected in Elements of the History of Locale Theory by Peter Johnstone

I've seen it mentioned on MO that during the East Coast Operator Algebra Symposium a while back concentrated on the $\mathbb{F}_{1}$ approach to RH, Alain Connes outlined how von Neumann's continuous geometry may have something to say about this approach. In the subsequent years, of course, Connes and Consani have found the Arithmetic Topos...

This might be opinionated, as feared, but I'd be interested in knowing what happened to this idea of von Neumann over the years, and how one can trace it through the literature (I'd like a lead...beyond von Neumann's text...)

Jon Bannon
  • 6,987
  • 6
  • 68
  • 110
-20

Category theory - though I should add, I'm no expert as experts go.

It's often thought, according to what I've read, as some fearsome and formidable machine - and I'd agree with that seeing some of the texts I've seen. But almost everything is when built over a long period, with care, and dedication.

We teach arithmetic to school-children but not higher number theory even though they rely on the same framework: the integers.

Likewise, if I had to teach category theory to kids or lay adults; I'd simply say they are 'curved' vectors (expecting them to know what vectors are). Most likely, they would think it simple to be profound ... but life and thought is often like that.

Another one might be graph theory. It's readily understandable what a graph is, easily drawable; though all the books, I've seen eschew the visual and give a really dry and axiomatic description. This really annoys me. There is nothing wrong with explaining concepts with drawings.

Finally another, for me, would be differential geometry. On the usual exegesis it's very difficult to understand. But it's easily understandable by drawing diagrams and this links into the first profound idea - that is category theory - since it's easy to motivate the tangent functor this way (if not the cotangent bundle, but none cannot have everything).

edit

@Wojuwu: Well, for one thing, there is no such tag on MathOverflow. Does that answer your question? For another, the question asks for concepts which are profound but not popular. Teaching ideas to school-kids, seems to exemplify this. We teach kids, big ideas in an easy way ...

Todd Trimble
  • 52,336
Mozibur Ullah
  • 2,222
  • 14
  • 21
  • 18
    How is category theory not popular? These days just about every mathematician (and to some extent every computer scientist) is expected to know at least the rudiments of categorical language. Sure we don't teach it to kids and laymen, but neither do we teach them algebraic geometry (say). I also don't see how categories are in any way "'curved' vectors". – Wojowu Nov 17 '20 at 16:57
  • 4
    "Well, for one thing, there is no such tag on MathOverflow. Does that answer your question?" Are you sure? – Noah Schweber Nov 17 '20 at 18:56
  • 5
    If you check that link, the tag was created 11 years ago, which I think is older than your post, though I've never been good with numbers. – Zach Goldthorpe Nov 17 '20 at 19:02
  • "You've just added it?! The tagging system complained when I tried. So either it, or you, are being misleading. As Holmes said, if you eliminate the impossible ..," Check the tag history, it was created 7 years ago by Francois Dorais. – Noah Schweber Nov 17 '20 at 19:08
  • 1
    Actually it was created 11 years ago - see the tag info. What was created 7 years ago was the tag description. Still not me, though. – Noah Schweber Nov 17 '20 at 19:18
  • 8
    I don't see how any of the topics you've suggested (category theory, graph theory, differential geometry) are at all unpopular. Your answer seems to focus on whether they're explained well, but that's not what the question is asking. – Noah Schweber Nov 18 '20 at 01:20
  • 8
    @MoziburUllah : Not only has the tag existed for a long time, but it seems you have used the tag yourself. – Timothy Chow Nov 18 '20 at 15:04