Mathematics: Trends

  • Mark Kac
  • Gian-Carlo Rota
  • Jacob T. Schwartz
Part of the Modern Birkhäuser Classics book series


Unlike disciplines with empirical backgrounds, mathematics lacks central problems that are clearly defined and universally agreed upon. As a result, the development of mathematics proceeds along a number of seemingly unrelated fronts, which tends to present a picture of fragmentation and division. Adding to the difficulty of evaluating its present state and of (guardedly!) predicting its future, is the fact that during the past few decades mathematics became increasingly isolated from its sister disciplines, and as a result of turning inward there was a marked increase in the level of abstraction and a reinforcement of the ever-present trend to greater and greater generality.


Brownian Particle Diophantine Equation Continuum Hypothesis Catastrophe Theory Fundamental Tone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Stone, M. The revolution in mathematics. American Mathematical Monthly 68, 715–34 (1961).MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ewing, J. H., Gustai’son, W. H. Halmos, P. R., Moolgavkar, S. H. Wheeler, W. H., and Ziemer, W. P. American mathematics from 1940 to the day before yesterday. American Mathematical Monthly 83, 503–16 (1976).CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mckean, H. P. and Singer, I. M. Curvature and the eigenvalues of the Laplacian. Journal of Differential Geometry 1, 43–69 (1967).MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deakin, M. A. B. Catastrophe theory and its applications. Mathematical Scientist 2, 73–94 (1977).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fowler, D. H. The Riemann-Hugoniot catastrophe theory and the van der Waals equation. In Towards a theoretical biology,Vol. 4, pp. 1–7. (Ed. V. H. Waddington.) Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kac, M. Quelques problèmes mathématiques en physique statistique. Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal (1974).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kac, M. On applying mathematics: reflections and examples. Quarterly Journal of Applied Mathematics 30, 17–29 (1972).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chaitin, G. J. Randomness and mathematical proof. Scientific American 232 (5), 47–52 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    May, R. M. Simple mathematical models with very complicated dynamics. Nature 261, 459–67 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    May, R. M. Biological population nonoverlapping generations: stable points, stable cycles, and chaos. Science 186, 645–7 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Linnik, Y. V. Les nombres entries se pretent-ils aux jeux hasard? Atoms 245, 441–6 (1967).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rota, G. C. Combinatorics. Chapter 6 in the present volume.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Kac
  • Gian-Carlo Rota
    • 1
  • Jacob T. Schwartz
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept. of Mathematics and PhilosophyMITCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Courant InstituteNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations