>>11536077Yes, Terence Tao is an excellent mathematician. I agree that he is universal in the sense that he has, and continues to, reliably publish across subfields. Further, I am confident that if there exists a gap in his understanding he has the capacity to mend it, quickly.
However, I would not say that he is on track to be the next Euler. If you think of universal in that sense, then no. This is not to detract from his accomplishments or anything of the sort, it’s just a reality of the times. The 19th century really put everything on firm footing and ever since mathematics has matured to the point where it’s just not possible to be an Euler or Gauss anymore.
Tao will be remembered for what he is, a first rate mathematician that contributed to many areas of mathematics. You could justify calling him a universal mathematician, but not on the level of ‘universality’ of the past greats if you will.
