<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Fundamental&#8221; Theorems</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/</link>
	<description>Dedicated to the mathematical arts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 May 2015 09:17:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.41</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ars Mathematica &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Lax Attack</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-85</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ars Mathematica &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Lax Attack]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:44:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-85</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Last week, when Michael asked for a list of fundamental theorems in different branches of mathematics,  &quot;&gt;Juan de Mairena suggested the Lax Equivalence Theorem as a candidate. Today on ArXiv I spotted a paper that makes the rather dramatic claim that the theorem is &#8220;wrong&#8221; &#8212; not that it is wrong in the strict mathematical sense, but that its conditions are not realistic for real-world problems. I&#8217;m not in a position to evaluate the claim (I never even heard of the result until Juan&#8217;s comment), but I thought it was interesting to see a paper on the subject so soon after we discussed it. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Last week, when Michael asked for a list of fundamental theorems in different branches of mathematics,  &#8220;&gt;Juan de Mairena suggested the Lax Equivalence Theorem as a candidate. Today on ArXiv I spotted a paper that makes the rather dramatic claim that the theorem is &ldquo;wrong&rdquo; &mdash; not that it is wrong in the strict mathematical sense, but that its conditions are not realistic for real-world problems. I&#8217;m not in a position to evaluate the claim (I never even heard of the result until Juan&#8217;s comment), but I thought it was interesting to see a paper on the subject so soon after we discussed it. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: demairena</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[demairena]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jul 2005 15:43:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-58</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just found a different proof of Lax E.Thm., by using Fourier methods:
http://www.acm.caltech.edu/~acm210/2005/WINTER/week3.pdf]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just found a different proof of Lax E.Thm., by using Fourier methods:<br />
<a href="http://www.acm.caltech.edu/~acm210/2005/WINTER/week3.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.acm.caltech.edu/~acm210/2005/WINTER/week3.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sigfpe</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sigfpe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jul 2005 15:35:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-57</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Theoretical Physics: Noether&#039;s Theorem (symmetries give rise to conservation laws)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Theoretical Physics: Noether&#8217;s Theorem (symmetries give rise to conservation laws)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: demairena</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-56</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[demairena]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jul 2005 15:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-56</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lax Equiv. Thm: a consistent finite difference scheme for a well posed initial value problem is convergent if and only if it is stable.
Is a very deep theorem, which follows from the Uniform boundedness principle.

By the way, Lax won the Abel Prize this year: http://www.abelprisen.no/en/prisvinnere/2005/documents/abelprize_2005_EN.pdf , (previously, Jean-Pierre Serre in 2003, and MF Atiyah and IM Singer in 2004)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lax Equiv. Thm: a consistent finite difference scheme for a well posed initial value problem is convergent if and only if it is stable.<br />
Is a very deep theorem, which follows from the Uniform boundedness principle.</p>
<p>By the way, Lax won the Abel Prize this year: <a href="http://www.abelprisen.no/en/prisvinnere/2005/documents/abelprize_2005_EN.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.abelprisen.no/en/prisvinnere/2005/documents/abelprize_2005_EN.pdf</a> , (previously, Jean-Pierre Serre in 2003, and MF Atiyah and IM Singer in 2004)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Megan</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-55</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Megan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jul 2005 06:26:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-55</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Graph Theory: Menger&#039;s Theorem. 

Let G be a graph and A, B be vertices in G.  Then the minimum number of vertices separating A from B in G is equal to the maximum number of A-B disjoint paths in G.

There are three proofs available in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.math.uni-hamburg.de/home/diestel/books/graph.theory/download.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Diestel.&lt;/a&gt;

Also Number Theory (and my favorite):  There are infinitely many primes...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Graph Theory: Menger&#8217;s Theorem. </p>
<p>Let G be a graph and A, B be vertices in G.  Then the minimum number of vertices separating A from B in G is equal to the maximum number of A-B disjoint paths in G.</p>
<p>There are three proofs available in <a href="http://www.math.uni-hamburg.de/home/diestel/books/graph.theory/download.html" rel="nofollow">Diestel.</a></p>
<p>Also Number Theory (and my favorite):  There are infinitely many primes&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Walt</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-54</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Walt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jul 2005 06:17:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-54</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is the Lax equivalence theorem?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is the Lax equivalence theorem?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: demairena</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[demairena]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2005 13:18:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-53</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Functional Analysis: Hanh- Banach&#039;s Theorem.

Numerical Analysis (PDE): Lax equivalence Theorem.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Functional Analysis: Hanh- Banach&#8217;s Theorem.</p>
<p>Numerical Analysis (PDE): Lax equivalence Theorem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterMcB</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PeterMcB]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2005 13:08:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-52</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Algebraic Topology:  Van Kampen&#039;s Theorem.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Algebraic Topology:  Van Kampen&#8217;s Theorem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterMcB</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-51</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PeterMcB]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2005 11:47:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-51</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apologies -- an anti-Cantorian (Weierstraussian?) gremlin crept into my post:  I should have said:

Set Theory: Cantorâ€™s theorem that the real numbers are uncountable.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apologies &#8212; an anti-Cantorian (Weierstraussian?) gremlin crept into my post:  I should have said:</p>
<p>Set Theory: Cantorâ€™s theorem that the real numbers are uncountable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeterMcB</title>
		<link>http://www.arsmathematica.net/2005/06/30/fundamental-theorems/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PeterMcB]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2005 11:45:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arsmathematica.net/?p=76#comment-50</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mathematical Statistics:  The Central Limit Theorem
Logic:  Godel&#039;s Incompleteness Theorems
Set Theory:  Cantor&#039;s theorem that the rationals are uncountable
Number Theory:  The non-rationality of the square-root of 2 (due to Pythagoras?)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mathematical Statistics:  The Central Limit Theorem<br />
Logic:  Godel&#8217;s Incompleteness Theorems<br />
Set Theory:  Cantor&#8217;s theorem that the rationals are uncountable<br />
Number Theory:  The non-rationality of the square-root of 2 (due to Pythagoras?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
