Talk:Olga Ladyzhenskaya

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


from AMS notices:

In October 1943 she finally became a student at Moscow State University and graduated in 1947. During these years, I. G. Petrovskii was her adviser. At that time she was st rongly influenced by Gelfand’s seminar.

In 1947 Olga married A. A. Kiselev, a Leningrad resident, so she moved there, with a recommendation from Moscow State University to the graduate school of Leningrad State University (LGU). At LGU S. L. Sobolev was appointed to be her scientific adviser.

Sasha (talk) 16:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sasha,
thank you for evidencing grounds for the citation: as in the case of the entry about Olga Oleinik, I haven't accurately read all the sources yet. However, let me point out a detail: wouldn't it be more appropriate to use the academic_advisor field of the {{Infobox scientist}} template? It seems to me that Ivan Petrovsky was her doctoral, i.e. candidate of science, advisor while Sergei Sobolev advised her in later stages of her career: am I wrong? Let me know. Best, Daniele.tampieri (talk) 18:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Daniele,
what I understood from the source is that she transferred from Moscow to Leningrad in the middle of her graduate studies. But perhaps I am wrong, we can check the other sources.
Sasha (talk) 19:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sasha,
Ok, let's freeze the {{Infobox scientist}} as is now: we'll check later how the things are. As my parents always say "One issue a time". Daniele.tampieri (talk) 20:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sasha,
I've checked some sources and it seems to me that you were right: Sergei Sobolev should be credited as her "PhD" advisor, while Ivan Petrovsky should be credited as an earlier advisor. Daniele.tampieri (talk) 14:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Daniele,
I still think mentioning two advisors is better. I have just opened one of her first papers, "On the uniqueness of the solution of Cauchy's problem for a linear parabolic equation" (1950, submitted in 1948), and in the second paragraph it says:

В связи с этим И. Г. Петровским была поставлена за­дача распространить результаты А. Н. Тихонова на такого рода систе­мы. Мне удалось это сделать для случая одного уравнения.

In free translation:

In this connection, I.G.Petrovsky posed the problem to extend the results of A.N.Tikhonov to systems of this type. I managed to do it for the case of one equation.

I.e. some of her first problems were posed by Petrovsky.
Sasha (talk) 16:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sasha,
you're right: let's keep the mention of the two advisors: while reading carefully all sources, we'll surely manage to describe precisely her academic career, clarifying the exact roles of all players. By the way, I apologize for not being too much present on the Wiki recently: I've a new job and I'm very busy. :-D Daniele.tampieri (talk) 16:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


Hi Daniele,

should what is now in the "influenced" line of the infobox be in the "known for" line?

Sasha (talk) 00:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sasha,
I did it. Correctly speaking, she is known for her contribution in those fields (and obviously influenced their development), therefore the parameter 'known_for' is more appropriate for listing her contributions. She surely influenced indirectly also other areas with her policies in research and teaching: however, I am not aware of surveys article tracing her influences, and I've not read accurately all references in order to know all the opinion of her (scientific) biographers about this point. Sorry for the delay in my answer, and nice to hear from you. :-D Daniele.tampieri (talk) 08:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Daniele,
I thought "influenced" was for people (see e.g. Juergen Moser). But then I thought that perhaps the conventions prescribe something different (that's why I left a note for you here instead of changing it myself).
Sasha (talk) 15:42, 3 March 2012 (UTC)