Live data from Hacker News

Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

ams.org

21–30 of 33 posts

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#21

Grothendieck's work is, for me, a rather perfect example of what's happened in the 20th century to mathematics, where the boundaries of knowledge have been pushed so hard and so far that there is almost no hope for anyone to even begin to understand the substance of the work outside a very tiny circle of people who pretty much dedicated life to that arcane corner of the field. I really wish vulgarization was an actua…

I disagree with the other comments. I can give you concrete reasons to care about algebraic geometry. I don't know enough of Grothendeick's vast generalizations yet to give you a good answer. I'm sure that I'll find applications of it, though ;)

Algebraic geometry, broadly construed, is the study of solutions to polynomial equations, just as linear algebra is the study of linear equations. I hope we'll both agree that linear algebra is used literally /everywhere/. Algebraic geometry sees a fair bit of use, mostly through the use of objects called as a Grobner basis, which allows us to solve for large systems of polynomial equations efficiently. The book "Ideals, Varieties, and Algorithms" goes into detail about this sort of "effective algebraic geometry" that's used to solve systems.

One algebraic geometry tool I have personally used is known as cylindrical algebraic decomposition. It's quantifier elimination for real polynomials, so you can use it to ask questions about behaviours of polynomials and compute answers to them. So if you have a problem that can be phrased as "can polynomials do this" [think safety/liveness properties], you can use cynlindrical algebraic decompostion to answer such questions.

My understanding is that Grothendeick's vast generalizations and perspectives allows one to take "geometric insight" gained from thinking about polynomials, and translate them into many many more settings. He had visions of number theory, so he built a lot of (very general) machinery, with an eye towards number theoretic problems. But really, the machinery is so general, and casts deep geometric insight on such a basic object of mathematics (rings and their ideals, as well as "what is gemometry") that I can see myself using what AG I know many, many times in the coming years.

Then there is also a whole branch of math called as tropical geometry which transports a lot of the AG machinery into piecewise functions. This is incredibly useful, because the AG machinery is very powerful, while piecewise linear functions are ubiquitous. It's early days [to my understanding] of tropical geometry, and I know woefully little about it. But I feel that if I learn more, I can gain a lot of useful algorithms and insight from the field. For more, there is an AMS intro article: https://www.ams.org/publications/journals/notices/201704/rno...

For more topological flavoured answer, check out the book Elementary Applied Topology by robert ghirst: https://www.math.upenn.edu/~ghrist/notes.html. It chronicles large swathes of algebraic topology and related fields in a clean, accessible style with applications.

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#22
post #10

I am currently learning modern algebraic geometry (scheme theory) from Ravi Vakil's algebraic geometry in the time of COVID: https://math216.wordpress.com/agittoc-2020/ . It's a great ongoing course that offers amazing intuition into scheme theory. We're divided into "working group(oid)s" where we discuss the mathematics and solve the weekly homework assigned by Ravi. Best of all, anyone [all over the world] can join…

Thanks for sharing, it looks really interesting, too bad I did not know about it earlier (but I will still try to watch the lectures). Are there more initiatives like that one? I know Terry Tao had open lectures online, so it is probably popular nowadays.

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#23
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As another commenter mentioned, currently Ravi Vakil is teaching a course in modern algbraic geometry. The course is largely based on Vakil's book in progress, which he titled The Rising Sea , after a quote from Grothendieck: > I can illustrate the ... approach with the ... image of a nut to be opened. The first analogy that came to my mind is of immersing the nut in some softening liquid, and why not simply water? F…

> Concentric circles, e.g. x^2 + y^2 = 1 and x^2 + y^2 = 4. They don't intersect at all, right? Ah, except you forgot to count points over the complex numbers, where they do. How is this possible? Are you saying that there are pairs of complex numbers (x,y) such that x^2 + y^2 = 1 = 4?

You need to also count "points at infinity" in the "projective" plane. So the "projectivized" equations are actually X^2 + Y^2 = 1Z, and X^2 + Y^2 = 4Z. The intuition is similar to how 2 parallel lines will meet at the horizion (infinity).

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#24

Grothendieck's work is, for me, a rather perfect example of what's happened in the 20th century to mathematics, where the boundaries of knowledge have been pushed so hard and so far that there is almost no hope for anyone to even begin to understand the substance of the work outside a very tiny circle of people who pretty much dedicated life to that arcane corner of the field. I really wish vulgarization was an actua…

Geometric algebra could (will?) be used to simplify game engines, see Siggraph2019 Geometric Algebra:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX4H_ctggYo

Web site: https://bivector.net/

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#25

>> Alexander Grothendieck was a mathematician who became the leading figure in the creation of modern algebraic geometry. His research extended the scope of the field and added elements of commutative algebra, homological algebra, sheaf theory and category theory to its foundations, while his so-called "relative" perspective led to revolutionary advances in many areas of pure mathematics. He is considered by many to…

what is the point of this? usually this type of comment is when there's something inscrutable in the title of a post but the title of this post is literally "Who Is Alexander Grothendieck?"; if you didn't know who he was before clicking you certainly know afterwards.

When the link doesn't load and yet you are stuck with this boiling question in the title, you start to look for answers in the comments to decide how long you are willing to wait for the said link.

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#26
post #24

Grothendieck's work is, for me, a rather perfect example of what's happened in the 20th century to mathematics, where the boundaries of knowledge have been pushed so hard and so far that there is almost no hope for anyone to even begin to understand the substance of the work outside a very tiny circle of people who pretty much dedicated life to that arcane corner of the field. I really wish vulgarization was an actua…

Geometric algebra could (will?) be used to simplify game engines, see Siggraph2019 Geometric Algebra: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX4H_ctggYo Web site: https://bivector.net/

Geometric algebra and algebraic geometry are largely unrelated mathematical disciplines.

Algebraic geometry has to do with finding geometric structure in (the solutions of) systems of algebraic equations. Algebraic geometry is potentially useful whenever you're doing this, so cryptography, coding theory, optimization, ...

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#27
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As another commenter mentioned, currently Ravi Vakil is teaching a course in modern algbraic geometry. The course is largely based on Vakil's book in progress, which he titled The Rising Sea , after a quote from Grothendieck: > I can illustrate the ... approach with the ... image of a nut to be opened. The first analogy that came to my mind is of immersing the nut in some softening liquid, and why not simply water? F…

> Concentric circles, e.g. x^2 + y^2 = 1 and x^2 + y^2 = 4. They don't intersect at all, right? Ah, except you forgot to count points over the complex numbers, where they do. How is this possible? Are you saying that there are pairs of complex numbers (x,y) such that x^2 + y^2 = 1 = 4?

Oops, brain fart. No, 1 is not equal to 4 even in Grothendieck's world. Scheme theory only gets you so far...

A correct example of what I had in mind is x^2 + y^2 = 1 and (x - 2)^2 + y^2 = 1.

That said, algebraic geometry takes care of this "bad example" also. This is done exactly as alcolade explained: consider "points at infinity" in projective space.

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#28
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Concentric circles, e.g. x^2 + y^2 = 1 and x^2 + y^2 = 4. They don't intersect at all, right? Ah, except you forgot to count points over the complex numbers, where they do. How is this possible? Are you saying that there are pairs of complex numbers (x,y) such that x^2 + y^2 = 1 = 4?

You need to also count "points at infinity" in the "projective" plane. So the "projectivized" equations are actually X^2 + Y^2 = 1 Z, and X^2 + Y^2 = 4 Z. The intuition is similar to how 2 parallel lines will meet at the horizion (infinity).

Thanks, I think I got it.

Re: Who Is Alexander Grothendieck? (2008) [pdf]

#30

Stories like these suggest to me that genius level creativity equals intrinsic motivation plus time. They also demonstrate that such motivation cannot be adjusted at will. It amounts to one's deepest understanding of where personal progress or best direction lies. Thus when Grothendieck or Swedenborg had religious experiences later in life their technical output ceased because their motivations had changed irrevocabl…

I should have written, 'They also demonstrate that such motivation cannot be adjusted at whim.'
Post reply on HN