Talk:Évariste Galois/Archive 1

National spelling
This article seems to be using British "ize" spelling:
 * "His argument is neither sufficiently clear nor sufficiently developed to allow us to judge its rigour."
 * "The importance of the work was not generally recognized during his lifetime".

"Honour" is not an incorrect spelling, it is a perfectly normal British spelling. Rama 17:13, 16 August 2005 (UTC)


 * "ize" spellings are not distinctly British. The Webster's New World College Dictionary ("the premier dictionary of American English", or so sayth the cover), doesn't list recognise at all. The 1913 Webster so popular on the web lists recognise as a secondary spelling only. I don't see any reason not to change that rigour to rigor, or better yet, stop meddling with it. --Prosfilaes 17:38, 16 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I wasn't very clear: I meant that there are two sorts of British spellings, the "honour/centre/specialise" one, and the "honour/centre/specialize", this one being apparently of the second category (the "-ise" form seems to be actually typically British).
 * Typically, articles should be self-consistant, that's why I changed "honor" into "honour". Rama 17:47, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I just made the spelling to "honor/rigor"; it turn out that the article was started with American spelling and that the piece of British spelling was added later on. It did not occure to me at first that this might have happened in this way. Sorry for the over-long discussion about this minor detail. Rama 06:10, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Distracted from math
Wouldn't it be more neutral to say that his time was split between politics and math? To say he's distracted implies a negative connotation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.250.166.237 (talk) 18:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Attention to detail
"A couple of days later, Galois took his second, and final attempt at entering the Polytechnique..." 'A couple of days later' is flimsy considering the detail presented in this article. Does anyone know how many days after his father's death he took his second attempt at the Polytechnique exam? --159.178.249.172 (talk) 16:26, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Wrong
Galois is said to have been a Catholic in the box in the article. Both his parents were anti-Catholic and I am not sure that Galois was baptised or had any other connection with Catholicism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 (talk) 15:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The MacTutor article notes that Galois' mother imparted her opposition to religion to her son. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 (talk) 11:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The theory has now been taken out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.30.71.244 (talk) 17:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Fourier
Fourier seems to have been a fellow Leftist of Galois'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.148.17.92 (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * All three, Fourier and the two mentioned in connection with the duel, seem to have been Leftists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.131.177 (talk) 15:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Poisson and Poisson's father both held strong Leftist opinions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 12:00, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * All four held Leftist opinions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

École Normale
The first paragraph of the "Budding mathematician" section says that Galois enrolled in the École Normale in 1828. The fourth paragraph says that he entered the École Normale after his second rejection from the Polytechnique. This seems contradictory, but if this is normal in the French education system, that should be noted.

Also, the "Political firebrand" section says that he was expelled from the École Normale, but the previous section noted that he received his degree in 1829. Does that mean that he stuck around as a researcher at the École Normale after receiving his degree? This could be a little more clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piercebeatz (talk • contribs) 22:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Also solved by Abel?
IIRC Abel and Galois did not solve the same problem.

Abel showed that a general quintic polynomial could not be solved by radicals.

Galois derived a criterion to identify which quintic polynomials could be solved by radicals.

In other words Abel's work reduces to: "Not all quintics are solvable by radicals.", while Galois's reduces to: "Give me any quintic polynomial and I will tell you how to find out whether it is solvable by radicals or not."

The problem solved by Galois is much harder.

Bad cut-and-paste error?
The last three sentences of "Budding Mathematician" should obviously be the last sentences of "Early Life", if you pay attention to the dates and Galois' age in those sections. I'm going to fix it.