Talk:Group theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
[edit] Scope and structure
Now that Group (mathematics) has reached GA status, I feel that it is time to start working on this article and reduce overlap between the two articles. To do this I think we need to firmly establish what the scope of the article should be.
I feel that this article should mainly deal with the field of research in mathematics dealing with groups. So it should deal with the history of the subject (starting with Galois and abel probably), the major players (past and present), major results, open questions, and current branches of research. It should probably also say something about connections with others fields of research and thus applications. (note that these should be applications of the theory of groups-i.e. situations in which the results obtained by considering abstract groups are useful- not merely situations where groups are applied) (TimothyRias (talk) 08:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC))
- Sounds good. I have a little trouble envisioning the result -- each major research area has its own history, players, results, and open questions, and similarly in each era, the division of group theory into subfields was different. It is probably a good idea to sketch out the table of contents here. JackSchmidt (talk) 12:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Mock TOC:
- lead
- History
-
- History of the abstract group concept could be a decent source.
- Felix Klein's Erlangen program
- Major results
-
- Classification of finite simple groups, etc.
- Groups vs. geometry. Groups vs. symmetry
- Branches of group theory
-
- Representation theory
- Combinatorical group theory
- Geometric group theory
- Open problems/current branches of research.
- Applications
-
- Applications in other fields of mathematics:
-
- (algebraic) topology:
fundamental group, classifying space (BGLn) vs. group cohomology, K-theory number theoryAlgebraic geometry (abelian varieties, Jacobian varieties)- Galois theory. Mention profinite groups. Also Differential Galois theory (corresponding to Lie groups)
- geometry via geometric group theory, geometric invariant theory
- (algebraic) topology:
- Applications in other fields:
-
- cryptography (e.g. using ab. varieties over finite fields, in particular elliptic curves, Diffie-Hellman, fast exponentiation)
- coding theory
- Physics
- Chemistry (there are whole books about, e.g. Group Theory and Chemistry by Bishop)
Feel free to mess around with this.(TimothyRias (talk) 12:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC))
- I left a comment at Talk:Group (mathematics). In short that article comments on what is a group, whereas here the focus is on why, how, when, where to. The suggested table of contents is a good step in this direction. Geometry guy 20:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Fleshed out the TOC a little bit. (TimothyRias (talk) 15:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC))
Added some items to the TOC. It's getting longer and longer ... Jakob.scholbach (talk) 15:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
The List of group theory topics has a fairly good (and long) list of what could show up here. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 12:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] list of gp th topics
I copy below the content of the list of gp th topics. Items already mentioned or very close to ones covered are striked out. Indented items seem (to me) to be less relevant or irrelevant to the article. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 20:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Basic properties of groups
[edit] Group homomorphisms
[edit] Basic types of groups
[edit] Simple groups and their classification
[edit] Permutation and symmetry groups
[edit] Concepts groups share with other mathematics
[edit] Mathematical objects making use of a group operation
[edit] Mathematical fields & topics making important use of group theory
[edit] Algebraic structures related to groups
[edit] Group representations
See also list of harmonic analysis and representation theory topics
[edit] Computational group theory
[edit] Applications
[edit] Famous problems
- Burnside's problem
- Classification of finite simple groups
- Herzog-Schönheim conjecture
- Subset sum problem
- Whitehead problem
Word problem for groups
[edit] Other topics
[edit] restructuring
I did some restructuring of the article involving mainly the lead and the history section. I am considering also removing the part giving the definition of group, this adequately dealt with in the group article and having this here adds to the critisims that the two articles have too much overlap. This article (at least in my view) should not be about groups but about the field that studies them. (TimothyRias (talk) 09:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC))
- You are right, the lead was still totally out of shape. Probably this is the last we need to do, when everything else is pretty much done. History in front seems good to me. (I deleted the 2nd copy at the end. It also needs lots of improvement still, btw).
- As for the overlap: as a matter of fact, groups and group theory (as corpora of certain knowledge) do overlap. My aim with the basic stuff section was to give a condensed intro to some definitions which are central to group theory and will be used later in the article (such as group (obviously ;)), subs, quotients, homomorphisms, normal and composition series etc.) Some of them could theoretically be eliminated because they are already in the group article. But I think it is much nicer for a reader to be reminded of what a normal subgp is when reading about normal series.
- I would like to propose the following procedere: let's write up the article (as complete and comprehensive as possible), and then decide which content is moved where. Ideally, the gp article should be readable without prerequisites, the gp th article does have to refer to the knowledge of certain notions, but should nonetheless be somewhat self-contained. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 12:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. The lead should probably be re-edited at the end. My current restructuring was mainly to make clear to new editors coming into the article what the difference between the article should be. (pre-empting any new merger/deletion proposals from editors wandering by noticing that the lead of group theory deals mainly with groups instead of the theory.
About the basic stuff. This should probably be dealt with on a case by case basis. I.e. introducing concepts when needed and referring to the relevant articles for a more indepth discussion. If we don't do this I feel the size of this article could quickly get out of hand. (TimothyRias (talk) 13:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC))