189

My vote would be Milnor's 7-page paper "On manifolds homeomorphic to the 7-sphere", in Vol. 64 of Annals of Math. For those who have not read it, he explicitly constructs smooth 7-manifolds which are homeomorphic but not diffeomorphic to the standard 7-sphere.

What do you think?

Note: If you have a contribution, then (by definition) it will be a paper worth reading so please do give a journal reference or hyperlink!

Edit: To echo Richard's comment, the emphasis here is really on short papers. However I don't want to give an arbitrary numerical bound, so just use good judgement...

Gerry Myerson
  • 39,024
David Hansen
  • 13,018
  • 53
    You should probably bound the length, cuz otherwise you could just pick your favorite paper of Ratner, Grothendieck, Thurston, et cetera and the importance blows everything else away. – Autumn Kent Dec 01 '09 at 01:41
  • 40
    Or Gromov, "from whose sentences people have written theses" (as I have seen someone write somewhere) – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Dec 01 '09 at 02:31
  • 15
    The award for the corresponding question for paper titles would have to go to "H = W". Meyers and Serrin, Proc. Nat. Acad, Sci. USA 51 (1964), 1055-6. – John D. Cook Jan 06 '10 at 02:49
  • 3
    It also depends on what you define a "paper". A number of fundamental results have been announced, and their proof has been sketched, in the C.R. Acad. Sci. - and all of them are four pages long. – Delio Mugnolo Nov 09 '13 at 14:48
  • Golod, E.S; Shafarevich, I.R. (1964), "On the class field tower", Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR 28: 261–272 – TT_ stands with Russia Sep 27 '14 at 20:14
  • Have added as an answer the "On manifolds homeomorphic ..." mentioned, so that people can vote on it. – Mathieu K. Mar 24 '18 at 17:36
  • Even though it's over a 100 pages, my pick is Wiles' "Modular Elliptic Curves and Fermat's Last Theorem". –  Jul 04 '19 at 06:20

79 Answers79

189

A natural choice is Riemann's "On the Number of Primes Less Than a Given Magnitude" at only 8 pages long...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Number_of_Primes_Less_Than_a_Given_Magnitude

Jonah Sinick
  • 6,942
  • 10
    what is even further impressive about this paper is the extremely humble tone in which it is written, as opposed to many papers that get written these days (mostly in comp. sci, though, less in math) – Suvrit Sep 23 '10 at 07:40
136

John Nash's "Equilibrium Points in n-Person Games" (Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 36 (1) (1950) pp 48–49, doi:10.1073/pnas.36.1.48) is only about a page and is one of the most important papers in game theory.

David Roberts
  • 33,851
Matt S
  • 1
  • 125
    Nowadays this sort of paper would not get published at all, and would likely appear just as an answer on MathOverflow. – Andrej Bauer Nov 07 '11 at 14:26
  • The exact reference is indeed: Nash, Jr.F.J., Equilibrium Points in N-Person Games", Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. (1950), 48-49, but if you open Adrian's link you see that it is really one page. Basically, a Nobel prize in one page. Impressive! – Valerio Capraro Mar 20 '12 at 16:29
  • 7
    @Ryan Dang! Let's try that again (this should be better): http://www.pnas.org/content/36/1/48.full.pdf. – Todd Trimble Oct 24 '16 at 16:51
97

Paul Cohen's paper "The independence of the continuum hypothesis" in which he introduced forcing. Six pages long (and another six in the second paper, a year later) that completely changed logic and set theory.

JSTOR access (may require a paywall)

PubMedCentral (free copy)


While I'm at it, two more in set theory:

Kurt Goedel's proof of the consistency of the continuum hypothesis and the axiom of choice, a two pages long paper.

Link to article

And Zermelo's paper introducing the axiom of choice, a three pages long paper proving the well ordering theorem.

Link to article (may require a paywall)

Asaf Karagila
  • 38,140
  • 6
    For 1: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC221287/ and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300611/ are, I believe, open-access. Interestingly this is the same domain as you have linked to for Gödel's paper. Paper 3 (Zermelo) can be pirated legally due to its age, or downloaded from GDZ (like all of Mathematische Annalen): http://gdz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/ . But searching on GDZ is a major hassle; fortunately somebody else did it: http://math.sfsu.edu/smith/Math800/Outlines/Zermelo1904.pdf – darij grinberg Oct 30 '11 at 00:27
81

It's not a paper, and it's not groundbreaking, but it's short!

A One-Sentence Proof That Every Prime $p\equiv 1\pmod 4$ Is a Sum of Two Squares D. Zagier The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 97, No. 2 (Feb., 1990), p. 144 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2323918

Zavosh
  • 1,376
  • 29
    That's a beautiful one indeed. And it also has lot of potential for the (obscurity of the idea)/(line count) competition :P – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Jan 06 '10 at 03:39
  • 242
    And you can see that sentence for only $12 at JSTOR! – I. J. Kennedy May 17 '10 at 00:37
  • 2
    ...or broken up into a few sentences, but for free at Wikipedia (I guess that does decrease the cost/volume ratio). – Victor Protsak May 21 '10 at 02:23
  • 218
    Save 12 bucks: The involution on a finite set $S = {(x,y,z) \in \mathbb{N}^3 : x^2 +4yz = p } $ defined by:

    [ (x,y,z) \mapsto \left{ \begin{array}{cc} (x+2z,z,y-x-z) & \text{if } x < y-z \ ( 2y-x, y, y-x+z ) & \text{if } y-z < x <2y \ ( x-2y, x-y+z, y ) & \text{if } x > 2y \end{array} \right. ] has exactly one fixed point, so $|S|$ is odd and the involution defined by $(x,y,z) \mapsto (x,z,y)$ also has a fixed point.

    – Zavosh May 21 '10 at 11:46
  • 37
    One thing I've always wondered - is there any intuition behind the involution? – dvitek Sep 30 '10 at 04:16
  • 13
    +1 to Mariano and drvitek. It is hardly a memorable proof. That is, unless you have some special insight or photographic memory, you're not going to remember how that involution goes. I once wrote a crabby blog post about this proof, here: http://topologicalmusings.wordpress.com/2008/05/04/a-proof-from-the-book/ – Todd Trimble Nov 07 '11 at 22:09
  • 2
    While it isn't the actual paper, there is a short but interesting note that goes through how such an involution is constructed in the first result of a google search here – Francis Adams Nov 07 '11 at 21:46
  • https://mathoverflow.net/questions/31113/zagiers-one-sentence-proof-of-fermats-theorem – Zach Teitler Jun 23 '17 at 20:18
  • 1
    The paper Francis is referring to is called "The Liouville---Heath-Brown---Zagier proof of the two squares theorem" and can be found at its author's website https://www.math.tugraz.at/~elsholtz/WWW/papers/papers.HTML as a postscript file, or published, in German as "Kombinatorische Beweise des Zweiquadratesatzes und Verallgemeinerungen" Math. Semesterber. (2003) 50: 77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00591-003-0060-3 (also available for free from the author's website as a pdf) – David Roberts Mar 24 '18 at 23:58
  • 1
    PS. to Francis Adams' and Daniel Roberts's comment: A full (and extended) account in English was published: "A combinatorial approach to sums of two squares and related problems", Additive Number Theory: Festschrift in Honor of the sixtieth birthday of Melvyn B. Nathanson, Springer Verlag, 2010, pages 115-140, paper 30 on https://www.math.tugraz.at/~elsholtz/WWW/papers/papers.html – Christian Elsholtz Mar 25 '18 at 11:04
  • 1
    It is a paper, and it's short, but what's the argument for its importance? Fermat's result is important in number theory, but this particular proof seems like a side show. –  Feb 15 '19 at 19:06
80

H. Lebesgue, Sur une généralisation de l’intégrale définie, Ac. Sci. C.R. 132 (1901), 1025– 1028.

The beginning of measure theory as we know it, and a very short paper.

77

I get this nominee from Halmos...

E. Nelson, "A Proof of Liouville's Theorem", Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 12 (1961) 995

9 lines long. Not the shortest paper ever, but maximizes importance/length ...

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2034412

Gerald Edgar
  • 40,238
  • That's amazing! I once heard this proof orally expounded by Michael Rosen, but never knew a reference until now... – David Hansen Dec 01 '09 at 15:23
  • Not the shortest paper ever? Where can I find a shorter one? (With real mathematical content of course.) – Harald Hanche-Olsen Dec 01 '09 at 15:51
  • 13
    William C. Waterhouse, An Empty Inverse Limit, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Dec., 1972), p. 618. The body of the paper is only 6 lines. – Autumn Kent Dec 01 '09 at 17:29
  • 4
    Other shorties... from sci.math in 1994.

    P.H. Doyle: Plane Separation, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 64 (1968) 291; MR 36#7115.

    H. Furstenberg: On the Infinitude of Primes, Amer. Math. Monthly 62 (1955) 353; MR 16-904.

    D. Lubell: A Short Proof of Sperner's Lemma, J. Comb. Theory, Ser. A, vol.1 no. 2 (1966) 299; MR 33#2558.

    – Gerald Edgar Dec 02 '09 at 00:21
  • Nelson's an interesting character in a number of ways.

    http://www.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/papers/ezek.html

    – Michael Hardy Mar 07 '11 at 18:29
  • I think the really impressive thing is the paper has no mathematical symbols in it (it must have been tempting to add at least an $\epsilon$). – Ben Webster Apr 15 '15 at 03:19
  • Can be found for free here – Akiva Weinberger Sep 02 '15 at 00:17
  • Note that the last sentence of the paper is redundant, so 8 lines would have been enough. – Dan Romik Sep 13 '15 at 03:38
  • Freely available here http://www.nada.kth.se/~holmin/files/dump/2034412.pdf – Alexey Ustinov Jul 04 '17 at 08:36
58

Not sure how important, but certainly short.

Ian Agol
  • 66,821
  • 11
    It's a disproof of a conjecture by no less than Euler! – David Roberts Apr 15 '15 at 02:33
  • 9
    I think that "a direct search" is a little disingenuous. A fair bit of cleverness must have gone into this, especially in '66. – Igor Rivin Apr 23 '17 at 02:39
  • 6
    @IgorRivin I think this is a reflection of attitudes towards computers in mathematics at the time, and the general inaccessibility of computers and computer programs of the time. – zibadawa timmy Jul 05 '17 at 01:55
  • This is from Bull. Amer. Math. Soc 72.6 (1966): 1079. The AMS hosts a link at https://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1966-72-06/S0002-9904-1966-11654-3/S0002-9904-1966-11654-3.pdf –  Feb 15 '19 at 19:10
  • 4
    Is this the first conjecture disproved by the use of computers ? – Anthony Jul 04 '19 at 14:39
47

Kahn and Kalai's, "A counterexample to Borsuk's conjecture" is a 3-page paper which settles a sixty-year-old conjecture with an explicit counterexample in $\mathbb{R}^{1325}$ (and in all sufficiently high dimensions). Although the paper is 3 pages, most of that is background on the problem and references --- the construction itself is only one paragraph.

They include a literary quote.

"However contracted, that definition is the result of expanded meditation." —Herman Melville, Moby Dick

47

Noam Elkies, The existence of infinitely many supersingular primes for every elliptic curve over Q, Invent. Math. 89 (1987), 561-568.

Pete L. Clark
  • 64,763
45

Erdős' 1947 paper ``Some remarks on the theory of graphs'', which is just 3 pages long, gives the lower bound $R(k,k)>2^{k/2}$ for the diagonal Ramsey numbers. It could have been a much shorter paper; he completes the proof of the lower bound before the end of the first page!

The paper is important not just for the bound, which (essentially) hasn't been improved in 65 years, but also for the method used; although this paper wasn't the first to use the probabilistic method, it is certainly the most influential early paper to have done so.

P. Erdős, Some remarks on the theory of graphs, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 53 (1947) 292-294

pts
  • 131
David Galvin
  • 1,112
44

Riemann's Habilitationsschrift, On the hypotheses which lie at the foundation of geometry, was the start of Riemannian Geometry. An English translation took up 6 pages in Nature.

S. Carnahan
  • 45,116
43

Depending on how strict you are, this might not qualify as a paper. Hilbert's 1900 ICM talk in which he posed his 23 problems.

S. Carnahan
  • 45,116
42

One of the shortest papers ever published is probably John Milnor's Eigenvalues of the Laplace Operator on Certain Manifolds, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA, 1964, p. 542

He shows that a compact Riemannian manifold is not characterized by the eigenvalues of its Laplacian. It takes him little more than half of a page.

Lennart Meier
  • 11,877
40

The one-page paper

Golay, Marcel J. E.: "Notes on Digital Coding", Proc. IRE 37, p. 657, 1949,

which introduces the Golay code.

  • 1
    It's not even a whole page! – Robin Chapman Nov 02 '10 at 07:41
  • 2
    I first came across Golay codes when studying electrical engineering - I recal looking up this paper, thinking I understood it but I still had to experiment with examples for several days to really believe that such a simple thing could be such a powerful error correcting code. – Selene Routley May 20 '11 at 13:01
38

Kazhdan's paper "On the connection of the dual space of a group with the structure of its closed subgroups" introduced property (T) and proved many of its standard properties. And it's only 3 pages long (and it contains a surprisingly large number of details for such a short paper!)

Andy Putman
  • 43,430
34

The 1958 paper of Kolmogorov entitled "A new metric invariant of transient dynamical systems and automorphisms in Lebesgue spaces" is four pages long. This is the paper in which he defines the entropy of a dynamical system.

coudy
  • 18,537
  • 5
  • 74
  • 134
32

Endre Szemeredi's paper on the Regularity Lemma is just 3 pages long. I think that is a good candidate as well.

Szemerédi, Endre (1978), "Regular partitions of graphs", Problèmes combinatoires et théorie des graphes (Colloq. Internat. CNRS, Univ. Orsay, Orsay, 1976), Colloq. Internat. CNRS, 260, Paris: CNRS, pp. 399–401,

Asif
  • 1
27

My mention goes to V. I Lomonosov's "Invariant subspaces for the family of operators which commute with a completely continuous operator", Funct. Anal. Appl. 7 (1973) 213-214, which in less than two pages demolished numerous previous results in invariant subspace theory, many of which previously took dozens of pages to prove. It also kick-started the theory of subspaces simultaneously invariant under several operators, where it continues to be useful today. It's highly self-contained, using only the Schauder-Tychonoff theorem, if I remember correctly.

Ian Morris
  • 6,176
  • 5
    I also like Lomonosov and Rosenthal's "The simplest proof of Burnside's theorem on matrix algebras" that proves that a proper subalgebra of a matrix algebra over an algebraically closed field must have a non-trivial invariant subspace. 3 pages. – Dima Sustretov May 04 '11 at 23:40
25

Beilinson and Bernstein's paper "Localisation de $\mathfrak g$-modules" is probably the most important in geometric representation theory, and is roughly 3 pages long.

Ben Webster
  • 43,949
24

Instead of answering directly about which paper (I don't know), I think that a journal with amazing importance/page ratio was Funktsional. Anal. i ego Prilozhen./Functional analysis and its applications at the time when Gel'fand was the main editor (or Kirillov at some point). Typical paper in 1970-s was of much importance, recognizable names and results nowdays, while being usually something like 4 pages. If one looks at all the volumes in 1970-s together it is just a short interval at a bookshelf, amazing compression of thousands of important results, especially in view of many junk commercial journals nowdays which flag with impact factors like the notorious Chaos, solitons and fractals...

Zoran Skoda
  • 5,162
  • 2
  • 42
  • 35
24

Any of three papers dealing with primality and factoring that are between 7 and 13 pages:

First place: Rivest, R.; A. Shamir; L. Adleman (1978). "A Method for Obtaining Digital Signatures and Public-Key Cryptosystems". Communications of the ACM 21 (2): 120–126.

Runner-up: P. W. Shor, Algorithms for quantum computation: Discrete logarithms and factoring, Proc. 35nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Shafi Goldwasser, ed.), IEEE Computer Society Press (1994), 124-134.

Honorable mention: Manindra Agrawal, Neeraj Kayal, Nitin Saxena, "PRIMES is in P", Annals of Mathematics 160 (2004), no. 2, pp. 781–793.

  • Also

    Godel, K. "Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme, I." Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38: 173-98 (1931)

    and

    Turing, A.M. (1936), "On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem", Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 2 42: 230–65 (1937)

    – Steve Huntsman Dec 01 '09 at 02:09
  • One more FTW and in the spirit of the original question:

    Donaldson, S. K. Self-dual connections and the topology of smooth 4-manifolds. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.. 8, (1983), 81–83.

    – Steve Huntsman Dec 01 '09 at 02:17
  • 20
    Does it count if you publish in a conference proceedings with a 10-page limit (although I did buy an extra page). The full version, SIAM J. Computing 26: 1484-1509 (1997), was 26 pages. – Peter Shor Mar 19 '10 at 13:57
  • 5
    I'd say it counts and then some. I never saw a bunch of military types getting all excited and nervous about a paper on abelian categories or natural proofs and trying to understand the results. – Steve Huntsman Mar 19 '10 at 14:09
23

In theoretical CS, there's the Razborov-Rudich "natural proofs" paper, which weighs in at 9 pages. After introducing and defining the terminology, and proving a couple of simple lemmas, the proof of the main theorem takes only a couple of paragraphs, less than half a page if I recall correctly.

19

There are a very large number of very concise papers written in the USSR, back when it existed.

A good example would Beilinson's paper "Coherent sheaves on $\mathbb{P}^n$ and problems of linear algebra." It's probably not quite as earth-shaking as Milnor's paper, but it's also only slightly more than 1 page long.

Ben Webster
  • 43,949
  • 50
    Well, omiting all details is not the same thing as being space-efficient! :P – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Dec 01 '09 at 02:03
  • 4
    Can anyone sum up what Beilison's paper is about to me? Many thanks. – darij grinberg Jan 05 '10 at 23:36
  • 1
    Darij: this paper by Eisenbud-Floystad-Schreyer expands this construction of Beilinson: http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0104203 (one consequence is a good algorithm which is used in practice to calculate sheaf cohomology on projective space) – Steven Sam Sep 28 '14 at 17:35
  • 1
    @darijgrinberg: You've probably found this out by now, but it's basically an explicit description of the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves on $\mathbb{P}^n$. In modern terms, we'd say that Beilinson constructed (two) full exceptional collections on $\mathbb{P}^n$, by giving a "resolution of the diagonal." Of course, this is the paper that (implicitly) created those notions. It's really amazing, and well worth a read. – Daniel Litt Sep 28 '14 at 21:16
  • @DanielLitt: Thank you, but I fear you overestimated my progress. I still don't know what a derived category is and don't feel that I have the time and peace of mind to read myself into them properly. – darij grinberg Sep 28 '14 at 21:38
  • @darijgrinberg: No worries--another way of saying this is that the paper gives a good way to resolve any sheaf on $\mathbb{P}^n$ by sheaves whose cohomology and Ext groups we understand very well. – Daniel Litt Sep 28 '14 at 21:39
19

How about Leonid Levin (1986), Average-Case Complete Problems, SIAM Journal of Computing 15: 285-286? Quite important in complexity theory, and only two pages long, although very, very dense.

Peter Shor
  • 6,272
18

Robert Aumann's "Agreeing to Disagree" paper, at 3 pages of length, is one of the most important papers in its field.

17

I would recommend one very short "paper" by Grothendieck in some IHES publications has defined algebraic de Rham cohomology. (I don't think it maximizes the ratio in question, but it is an interesting one, anyway.)

BTW, it was actually part of a mail to Atiyah. It begins with 3 dots! (Maybe some private conversation was omitted). Of course, sometimes Grothendieck wrote long letters (e.g. his 700-page letter to Quillen "pursuing stacks" or his 50-page letter to Faltings on dessin d'enfant).

Also, I think Grothendieck had a (short?) paper with a striking title called "Hodge conjecture is false for trivial reason", in which he pointed out that the integral Hodge conj. is not true, one has to mod out by torsion, i.e. tensored with Q.

Denis Serre
  • 51,599
Yuhao Huang
  • 4,982
  • 23
    "The general Hodge conjecture is false for trivial reasons." I'm nitpicking, but it's easily my favorite title of a math paper ever. – Harrison Brown Dec 01 '09 at 03:28
  • 6
    What, you don't like "Zaphod Beeblebrox's brain and the fifty-ninth row of Pascal's triangle"? – Qiaochu Yuan Dec 01 '09 at 19:57
  • 5
    Funny as that is, it doesn't have the same oomph to it as "X is false for trivial reasons." While we're on the subject of funny titles, though, I like "Mick gets some (the odds are on his side)", which makes no sense whatsoever as a paper title until you realize what the paper's about! – Harrison Brown Dec 02 '09 at 02:01
  • 4
    Correcting the title is not just nitpicking. The paper is about a generalisation of the Hodge conjecture concerning a characterisation of the filtration on rational cohomology induced by the Hodge filtration. It deals with rational cohomology and so is not concerned with the failure of the (non-generalised) Hodge conjecture for integral cohomology. The latter result is due to Atiyah-Bott. – Torsten Ekedahl Mar 19 '10 at 05:24
  • 3
    My favorite title is P. Cartier, Comment l'hypothese de Riemann ne fut pas prouvee [How the Riemann hypothesis was not proved], Seminar on Number Theory, Paris 1980-81 (Paris, 1980/1981), pp. 35-48, Progr Math 22, Birkhauser, Boston, 1982, MR 85f:11035. – Gerry Myerson Sep 23 '10 at 06:42
  • Pursuing Stacks is indeed 600 pages long, but the letter to Quillen is only the first two sections (it was written over two days), and takes <15 pages. It's a persistent urban legend that the whole thing was a letter; it was more of a research diary covering 10 or so months of work. – David Roberts Jul 04 '19 at 05:10
  • The description of Grothendieck's paper is incorrect. Atiyah and Hirzebruch had earlier shown that the Hodge conjecture was false with $\mathbb{Z}$ coefficients. Grothendieck's showed that Hodge's statement of the generalized Hodge conjecture required correction. And the "reasons" weren't trivial: to prove that Hodge's statement was false required a recent result of Deligne. – A User Jul 18 '21 at 12:53
16

Here are two and a half papers in homotopy theory:

  1. Dan Kan introduced Kan complexes and the Kan complex approximation functor $\mathrm{Ex}^\infty$ in the three-page 1956 PNAS paper "Abstract Homotopy III" (here is a JSTOR link). I can't resist pointing out his 1958 Trans. Amer. Math Soc. paper "Adjoint Functors"—clearly too long for this contest at 36 pages—where he defines an adjunction of functors on the first page. Here is a link.

  2. The 1966 Quart. J. Math. Oxford paper $K$-theory and the Hopf invariant by Adams and Atiyah is only 8 pages long. I don't have a link to the paper, but here is a MathSciNet link. Adams and Atiyah use the Adams operations in $K$-theory to solve the Hopf invariant one problem. Adams' original proof (using secondary operations) takes 85 pages—of course that paper was extraordinarily fecund in homotopy theory.

Sam Isaacson
  • 488
  • 5
  • 10
16

Mordell, L.J., On the rational solutions of the indeterminate equations of third and fourth degrees, Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 21 (1922), 179–192.

In this paper he proved the Mordell-Weil theorem for elliptic curves over $\mathbb{Q}$ (the group of rational points is finitely generated), and he stated the Mordell conjecture (curves of genus >1 over $\mathbb{Q}$ have only finitely many points), which was one of the most important open problems in mathematics until Faltings proved it in 1983.

JS Milne
  • 8,176
  • 1
  • 42
  • 44
15

Barry Mazur "On Embeddings of Spheres", Bull. AMS v 65 (1959) only 5 1/2 pages. It introduced the method of infinite repetition in topology and allowed the proof the generalized Schoenflies conjecture.

15

I'm torn between

Tate, J. Endomorphisms of Abelian Varieties over Finite Fields, Invent Math 2, 1966, p. 134-144

Lubin, Jonathan; Tate, John. Formal complex multiplication in local fields. Ann. of Math. (2) 81 1965 380--387.

and

Drinfelʹd, V. G. Coverings of $p$-adic symmetric domains. (Russian) Funkcional. Anal. i Priložen. 10 (1976), no. 2, 29--40. bearing in mind that, as I recall, the English translation is only 7 pages long.

Longer than some of those above, perhaps; but maybe they win on "importance."

14

Jürgen Moser (1965), On the Volume Elements on a Manifold , Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 120, No. 2 (Nov., 1965), pp. 286-294

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1994022

Besides the many powerful applications of the famous "Moser argument" (or "Moser trick"), the local version gives a very nice and elegant proof of the classical Darboux Theorem.

(For a nice summary of this and other papers by Jürgen Moser, I would recommend Hasselblatt & Katok: The development of dynamics in the 20th century and the contribution of Jürgen Moser (a short discussion of the paper mentioned above can be found at p.17-18))

Spinorbundle
  • 1,909
14

A. Karatsuba and Yu. Ofman (1962). "Multiplication of Many-Digital Numbers by Automatic Computers". Proceedings of the USSR Academy of Sciences 145: 293–294.

Proved that multiplication of $n$-digit numbers could be done in less than quadratic time (thus disproving a conjecture by Kolmogorov) and provided the first divide-and-conquer algorithm for arithmetic.

14

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet, but Rostislav Grigorchuk's 1980 paper in which he constructs the Grigorchuk group is just under two pages:

On the Burnside problem on periodic groups, Funkts. Anal. Prilozen. 14, No 1 (1980) 53-54.

At the time, no one realized the full significance of this group, but some of the more remarkable properties are proven in the paper.

Things
  • 1
13

I read all 30 previous answers, and then did "search" on this page with my browser, and to my surprise I did not find Picard's name.

Picard's proof of the Picard Little Theorem certainly qualifies for this list. See, for example Littlewood's Miscellany, where he discusses the question, "Can a PhD thesis consist of one line?"

Picard's one-line proof started an enormous body of literature in XX century, beginning with Nevanlinna theory and including Hyperbolic groups.

To be sure, Picard's original paper (CR 88(1879)1024-7) is slightly longer than one line, but the proof itself (assuming the background that was well-known in 1879) is really one line, as reproduced in Littlewood:-)

A slight generalization of this is called Picard's Great Theorem, the only theorem that I know, which has the word "Great" in its standard name:-)

  • 5
    About your last sentence: Theorema Egregium comes very close... –  Jul 15 '13 at 17:31
  • As I understand "Egregium" was the name given by Gauss himself. In the case of Picard, it was centainly given by OTHERS :-) – Alexandre Eremenko Jul 15 '13 at 17:51
  • 2
    Littlewood/Picard has not been mentioned in this thread, but it has appeared elsewhere on this site: http://tea.mathoverflow.net/discussion/946/shortest-phd-thesis/ and http://mathoverflow.net/questions/54775/what-is-the-shortest-ph-d-thesis – Gerry Myerson Jul 15 '13 at 23:16
  • 2
    In French, we say the Great Fermat Theorem instead of the Last. – user56097 Sep 06 '17 at 18:52
12

Jannsen, Uwe (1992), "Motives, numerical equivalence and semi-simplicity", Inventions math. 107: 447–452.

12

J.-C. Yoccoz called

Carl L. Siegel, Iteration of analytic functions, Ann. of Math. 43(2) (1942), 607–612.

a "brief but historic article". In only 6 pages (including all necessary background) Siegel gave the first positive solution to a small denominator problem. This had been a major unsolved issue for over 60 years, and was a big thorn in the side for Poincaré. Siegel's paper is also credited with inspiring Kolmogorov to start the circle of ideas that led to KAM Theory. Buff, Henriksen, and Hubbard did not hesitate in calling it “one of the landmark papers of the twentieth century.”

Details

12

Perelman's "Proof of the soul conjecture of Cheeger and Gromoll." J. Differential Geom. 40 (1994), no. 1, 209–212,

https://doi.org/10.4310/jdg/1214455292

is, at 3 pages (plus a paragraph of remarks), a favourite of mine, although it has some pretty tough competition here.

kangdon
  • 516
10

Pretty late to the party here but Kantorovich's "On the translocation of masses" from 1942 is two pages. It gave a radically new look on the Monge problem of optimal transportation and can be seen as the starting point of an immense body of work on optimal transport and distances in probability spaces.

Dirk
  • 12,325
10

I remain in awe of the 1-page paper which started the whole geometric quantization approach to representations (with symplectic manifolds, moment maps, prequantum bundles, polarizations). Unlike many “short proof” papers quoted here, it’s “just” an announcement — but as a string of true statements which ended up driving the field for decades, I find its importance/length stunning:


Kostant

9

Golay's single page paper describing what is today known as Golay code, a perfect code of length 23. This is even used in NASA deep space missions, and is one of the only perfect codes which are not Hamming codes.

Campello
  • 800
9

The little paper by John McKay on Graphs, singularities, and finite groups is a nice example.

Graphs, singularities, and finite groups. The Santa Cruz Conference on Finite Groups (Univ. California, Santa Cruz, Calif., 1979), pp. 183--186, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., 37, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R.I., 1980.

9

Cooley and Tukey (re)invented the Fast Fourier Transform with a 5-page paper in Mathematics of Computation (1965).

Barry Cipra
  • 5,392
8

Évariste Galois, "Mémoire sur les conditions de résolubilité des équations par radicaux". I believe it's about 18 pages, but the foundations of Galois theory are contained within the first few pages.

8

MR0011027 Chern, Shiing-shen A simple intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula for closed Riemannian manifolds. Ann. of Math. (2) 45, (1944). 747–752

Quoting from Andre Weil's review: ``In order to understand the true nature of the Euler-Poincaré characteristic of a (differentiable) manifold, one has to consider it as a topological invariant of a fibre-space invariantly attached to the manifold, namely, of the space of tangent unit-vectors (or "tangent sphere bundle'') to the manifold. It is therefore only natural that an intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula (which expresses the Euler-Poincaré characteristic as the integral of a differential form invariantly attached to the Riemannian structure) should involve the consideration of that fibre-space. This is how the author proceeds here; and his proof, as he states, is merely the simplest example of a general method in the differential-geometric study of fibre-spaces, which is developed in the paper reviewed below."

The proof is truly intrinsic, as Chern did not use an isometric imbedding of a Riemannian manifold into an Euclidean space. And it is simple to follow.

8

My favorite has to be Mary Ellen Rudin, "An unshellable triangulation of a tetrahedron," Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 64 (1958), 90–91. An simple but incredibly ingenious construction that makes topological combinatorics much more complicated than you think it is.

8

The paper by Ron Graham and Bruce Rothschild which gives a really short proof (involving a complicated triple induction) of van der Waerden's theorem:

R.L. Graham and B.L. Rothschild, A short proof of van der Waerden's theorem on arithmetic progressions, Proc. American Math. Soc. 42(2) 1974, 385–386.

https://www.ams.org/journals/proc/1974-042-02/S0002-9939-1974-0329917-8/S0002-9939-1974-0329917-8.pdf

8

I know that this question was posted almost two years ago but I cannot resist suggesting

Zagier, D. Newman's short proof of the prime number theorem. Amer. Math. Monthly 104 (1997), no. 8, 705–708.

which is difficult to beat, I think.

  • 1
    Legal download from MAA: http://mathdl.maa.org/images/upload_library/22/Chauvenet/Zagier.pdf – darij grinberg Oct 30 '11 at 00:29
  • 1
    Wow!!! Thanks for the answer! This paper is pure magic (particularly IV)! Link: http://people.mpim-bonn.mpg.de/zagier/files/doi/10.2307/2975232/fulltext.pdf – user56097 Sep 06 '17 at 16:26
8

What about Atiyah's K-theory and Reality? I know it's not that short with its 20 pages, but if you see the paper, you notice that he didn't use his space very economically. He did provide the foundation of topological K-theory though.

  • 7
    Adams' review of this paper ends with ``The reviewer is conscious that the paper contains points of interest not mentioned above; he pleads that this is a paper of 19 pages which cannot be summarised adequately in less than 20, and urges topologists to read it.'' – Peter May Apr 11 '13 at 13:32
8

L. Euler, Solutio problematis ad geometriam situs pertinentis, Commentarii academiae scientiarum Petropolitanae 8, 1741, pp. 128-140

was the famous Bridges of Königsberg paper. It was the beginning of both topology and graph theory. It is translated into English in Newman's "World of Mathematics" and in Biggs, Lloyd & Wilson's "Graph Theory 1736-1936". In Opera Omnia it is 10 pages long.

7

I will vote for C.Fefferman's paper "The multiplier problem for the ball" http://mate.dm.uba.ar/~hafg/inter-u-2010/fefferman.pdf, which is only about 5 pages and he solved an open problem about multipliers, and he wrote this when he was only a teenager!

Tomas
  • 859
  • 1
  • 7
  • 12
7

Funny that Witt is not mentioned here. Indeed, his papers

Theorie der quadratischen Formen in beliebigen Körpern
(introducing Witt cancellation, Witt decomposition, the Hasse-Witt invariant, the Witt ring and in a little sidestep proving that every quadratic form in $\ge 5$ variables over a $\mathfrak{p}$-adic field is isotropic)

and

Zyklische Körper und Algebren der Chrakteristik $p$ vom Grad $p^n$
(introducing Witt vectors, Artin-Schreier-Witt theory and determining the structure of complete discrete valuation rings)

at 13 resp. 14 pages are among the longest he has ever published. But they both appeared in the remarkable volume 176 of Crelle's Journal, and given their importance, I think they still make up a reasonable answer.

7

Lawvere's paper "Quantifiers and sheaves" (1970 International Congress of Mathematicians at Nice, vol. 1, pp. 329--334) was the first publication of his work with Tierney on elementary topoi. It contains an amazing amount of information in just 6 pages.

More generally, the writings of Bill Lawvere have the highest theorem/sentence ratio I've seen (though Leonid Levin comes pretty close).

Andreas Blass
  • 72,290
7

The paper "Zum Hilbertschen Nullstellensatz" (Mathematische Annalen, vol. 102, page 520, 1930) in which Rabinowitsch (aka. Rainich) introduced his famous trick is one small page long - the body consists of just 13 lines!

The paper consists of a slick proof of the Nullstellensatz, but the usefulness of the trick of course goes beyond that, e.g. it is used to show that $GL_n$ is an affine algebraic group...

Peter Arndt
  • 12,033
  • 3
    Sorry, but isn't it obvious that $GL_n$ is an affine algebraic group? Do you mean something different? – David Corwin Jul 08 '12 at 21:11
  • 4
    @David: It is not completely obvious: the definition of $\operatorname{GL}_n$ expresses it as a Zariski-open subset of affine space, whereas to be affine it needs to be a Zariski-closed subset. The trick in question is to introduce an extra variable... – Pete L. Clark Jan 04 '14 at 11:39
7

Serre's GAGA isn't as short as some of the others, but it's still just over 40 pages (which is quite short by the standards of Serre/Grothendieck-style algebraic geometry at the time -- e.g. FAC is about 80 pages, and of course there are things like EGA...), and it's still GAGA.

7

The so called "Weil conjectures" are in the last pages of André Weil's short paper in 1949, "Numbers of solutions of equations in finite fields", Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 55: 497–508. They probably were around before though.

7

What about Ribet's great Inventiones paper from the 70's A modular construction of unramified $p$-extensions of $\mathbf{Q}(\mu_p)$ ? I think it should be mentioned!

From Ribet's website (pdf) or EuDML

David Roberts
  • 33,851
6

The 1949 paper by R.C. Bose "A Note on Fisher's Inequality for Balanced Incomplete Block Designs" arguably gave birth to the linear algebra method in combinatorics which has since been used by many to solve highly non-trivial problems as discussed here: Linear algebra proofs in combinatorics?

The paper is 2 pages long: https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177729958

Here's a description of Bose and his work from the manuscript Linear Algebra Methods in Combinatorics by Babai and Frankl:

The affiliation listed on Bose’s paper is the Institute of Statistics, University of North Carolina. Before taking up residence in the U.S. in 1948, Bose worked at the Indian Statistical Institute in Calcutta. One of the most influential combinatorialists of the decades to come, Bose was forced to become a statistician by the lack of employment chances in mathematics in his native country. A pure mathematician hardly in disguise, he reared generations of combinatorialists. His students at Chapel Hill included D. K. Ray-Chaudhuri, a name that together with his student R. M. Wilson (so, may be a grandson of Bose?) will appear several dozen times on these pages for their far reaching extension of Bose’s method.

Anurag
  • 1,157
6

Two fundamental papers in computational complexity theory and the theory of formal languages are very short:

  • Neil Immerman, Nondeterministic space is closed under complementation, SIAM Journal on Computing 17(5), 935–938, 1988 (four pages);

  • Róbert Szelepcsényi, The method of forcing for nondeterministic automata, Bulletin of the EATCS 33, 96–100, 1987 (five pages).

Both papers independently prove what is now called the Immerman-Szelepcsényi theorem, i.e., that nondeterministic space complexity classes are closed under complement, and in particular that context-sensitive languages are closed under complement. The authors shared the Gödel Prize in 1995 for their result.

I’ve never read Szelepcsényi’s version, but Immerman’s is so short and sweet that I found it hard to believe at first that it actually works as a proof of such an important theorem.

6

"Singularities of 2-spheres in 4-space and cobordism of knots" by Fox and Milnor. Ten pages which generated hundreds of papers in knot theory.

https://projecteuclid.org/journals/osaka-journal-of-mathematics/volume-3/issue-2/Singularities-of-2-spheres-in-4-space-and-cobordism-of/ojm/1200691730.full

6

My favourite is the following tiny, self-contained article:

"Uniform equivalence between Banach Spaces" by Israel Aharoni & Joram Lindenstrauss, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, Volume 84, Number 2, March 1978, pp.281-283.

https://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1978-84-02/S0002-9904-1978-14475-9/S0002-9904-1978-14475-9.pdf

(in which the authors prove that there exist two non-isomorphic Banach spaces that are Lipschitz homeomorphic.)

Ady
  • 4,030
5

Maybe the paper of R. Brauer and Fowler, K. A. (1955): "On groups of even order", Annals of Mathematic, Second Series 62: 565–583, ISSN 0003-486X, JSTOR 1970080, MR 0074414 deserves a mention since this is generally accepted as the point when it was realised the Classification of the Finite Simple Groups might be a feasible project.

5

I suggest Riemann's paper on the theory of abelian functions, which although over 50 pages in length, contains the topology and homology of compact topological surfaces, the Riemann (Roch) theorem, the algebraicity of compact Riemann surfaces, an independent algebraic argument for Riemann (Roch) for plane curves, derivation of the "Brill Noether" number at least for pencils, the generalized theta function, and much more. In my opinion this paper, by introducing complex analysis into the study of plane curves, gave rise to modern algebraic geometry.

roy smith
  • 12,063
5

Drinfeld and Simpson's B-Structures on G-Bundles and Local Triviality, Mathematical Research Letters 2, 823-829 (1995) comes in at under seven pages and has been quite important in all the work done on principal G-bundles (such as the geometric Langlands' program).

In particular, it proved the double quotient description of G-bundles on curves (for reductive G) which had previously only been proved for $G = SL_n$ by Beauville and Laszlo.

The paper can be found here.

Mike Skirvin
  • 2,666
  • 1
  • 18
  • 17
5

I think this is the shortest paper (1 page) with the most large title in combinatorics (24 words!):

"Alexander Burstein's Lovely Combinatorial Proof of John Noonan's Beautiful Formula that the number of $n$-permutations that contain the Pattern $321$ Exactly Once Equals $(3/n)(2n)!/((n-3)!(n+3)!)$"

by Doron Zeilberger, https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.4379.

Yannic
  • 527
4

My vote is:

  • K.A. Perko, Jr., On the classification of knots, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 45 (1974), 262-266.

This historical paper triumphantly concludes a century-old quest to tabulate prime knots with ten of fewer crossings. There are two pages of text explaining the methodology (covering linkage numbers), and three pages of tables. A widely accepted 19th century result of Little, that writhe of reduced diagrams of the same knot is the same, is falsified by the discovery of the Perko pair at the bottom of page 263. In my opinion this may be the most interesting mathematics mistake of all time.

For more on this paper and on the fascinating story behind it, see Richard Elwes's lovely blog post, and what I wrote here.

4

Faltings' article Endlichkeitssätze für abelsche Varietäten über Zahlkörpern has only 17 pages and proves the Tate and Shafarevich conjecture for abelian varieties over number fields, which implies as a corollary the Mordell conjecture.

4

Boyer’s vote, in A History of Mathematics (1968, p. 395):

in 1640, the young Pascal, then sixteen years old, published an Essay pour les coniques. This consisted of only a single printed page—but one of the most fruitful pages in history. It contained the proposition described by the author as mysterium hexagrammicum, which has ever since been known as Pascal’s theorem.

4

Only a few pages in length, this paper introduced famous "wild embeddings", arguably the most famous being the Alexander Horned Sphere constructed here.

Alexander, J. W. (1924), "An Example of a Simply Connected Surface Bounding a Region which is not Simply Connected", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, National Academy of Sciences, 10 (1): 8–10

3

A favourite of mine is Kobayashi and Wu's 4 page Annals paper "On holomorphic sections of certain Hermitian vector bundles" where they introduce the Bochner-method, which is nowadays used everywhere in differential geometry as an easy and effective method of proving vanishing results.

  • 7
    Bochner method was introduced by Bochner in 1946-48 and used by numerous authors to prove vanishing theorems for cohomology groups of vector bundles ever since. This remark, of course, is not meant to diminish Kobayashi-Wu's 1970 paper. – Misha May 25 '13 at 18:37
3

It's probably not the winner, but it certainly deserves mentioning:

Tate's p-Divisible groups paper, although not exactly short at 26 pages, contains an incredible number of new ideas. Almost every single thread in $p$-adic geometry (e.g. in Scholze's work) traces back to this paper.

Besides introducing $p$-divisible groups, he does the cohomology computation that is the beginning of Ax–Sen–Tate theory and lead to the development of Faltings's almost mathematics; and he proves the first case of what is now known as the Hodge–Tate decomposition (and asks whether this holds in bigger generality). And that's not even what he considers his main theorem!

2

Here is my list (in no specific order):

(*) A proof of Ehrenfeucht's conjecture about infinite systems of equations in free groups and semigroups by Victor Guba:
V.S.Guba "Equivalence of infinite systems of equations in free groups and semigroups to finite subsystems", Mathematical notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, September 1986, Volume 40, 3, pp 688-690.

(*) A.A.Razborov, “Lower bounds on monotone complexity of the logical permanent”, Math. Notes USSR, 37:6 (1985), 485–493.
As Laszlo Lovasz put it in his talk "The Work of A.A.Razborov" (can be easily found on the Internet):
In an area where any step forward seemed almost hopeless (but which was at the same time a central area of theoretical computer science) his results meant that deep methods could be developed and to obtain strong lower bounds for algorithms was not impossible.

(*) Isaac Newton "The mathematical principles of natural philosophy" - in this case the (finite) length of the work does not matter, since the importance is infinite :)

2

Crux Mathematicorum, 15: 7 (1989), p. 208. enter image description here

2

The paper 'You cannot hear the shape of the drum' by Gordon, Wolpert and Webb is very short considering the importance of the result and the sophistication of the methods used. It answers a question of Kac which was also posed in a short paper.

1

How about Galois's letter written on the eve of his death and published by Liouville 17 years later?

1

I suppose the word "importance" in the equation can allow for some subjective input (some papers might be important to certain people, while to others not so important for their work).

This paper, entitled Finiteness of the number of compatibly-split subvarieties by Kumar and Mehta, is only 3 pages long:

https://arxiv.org/abs/0901.2098

For those who work with Frobenius splittings, it is an important result, one which was actually believed to be true for decades but not proven until 2009!

1

I think this deserves to be mentioned here:

K. Hasegawa, Minimal models of nilmanifolds

In just 7 pages, using some deep results from rational homotopy theory and some basic Lie theory, the author establishes that the only even-dimensional nilmanifolds that are birationally equivalent to Kahler manifolds are tori.

But wait, there's more!

The author also shows that the only nilmanifolds that admit invariant symplectic structures are also tori.

user6419
  • 431
  • 2
  • 12
1

What about Selberg's 1947 paper?

  • If you are referring to Selberg's elementary proof of the prime number theorem, I feel that this paper should have been longer and that he is not clear about what he is doing in the article. – Hollis Williams Dec 12 '19 at 06:13
0

Not a winner but a strong candidate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golod-Shafarevich_theorem

-3

It is not a proper answer but...

It is impossible to separate a cube into two cubes, or a fourth power into two fourth powers, or in general, any power higher than the second, into two like powers. I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this margin is too narrow to contain.