Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Russian May Have Solved Poincare Conjecture

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the he-said-to-forward-the-prize-money-to-me dept.

The Almighty Buck 527

nev4 writes "Reuters (via Yahoo News) reports that Grigori Perelman from St. Petersburg, Russia appears to have solved the Poincare Conjecture. The Poincare Conjecture is one of the 7 Millenium Problems (another is P vs NP, also covered on /. recently). Solving a Millenium Problem carries a reward of $1M, but apparently Perelman isn't interested..." nerdb0t provides some background in the form of this MathWorld page from 2003.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp ya (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172922)

fp

YOU WIN FREE GMAIL! (1)

Fecal Troll Matter (445929) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172990)

For a limited time only... Your loginpassword is Fecal_Troll

Enjoy! [nyud.net]

Re:fp ya (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173004)

In Soviet Russia, Poincare Conjecture solves YOU!

Re:fp ya (-1, Troll)

Kosgrove (75723) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173221)

For those keeping score at home, mod that -1, Tired and Not Funny In The First Fucking Place.

Re:fp ya (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173284)

FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto] FAG [mailto]
You are not logged in. You can log in now using the convenient form below, or Create an Account, or post as Anonymous Coward.

Nick

Password
Public Terminal

Name
Anonymous Coward [ Create an Account ]

Subject

Comment

(Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!)
Logged-in users aren't forced to preview their comments. Create an Account!

Allowed HTML

    • (Use "ECODE" instead of "PRE" or "CODE".)
      URLs http://example.com/ [example.com] will auto-link a URL
      Important Stuff

      # Please try to keep posts on topic.
      # Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
      # Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
      # Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
      # Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
      # If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

      Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.

      Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain
      All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG.
      [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles

      Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain
      All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest
      Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain
      All trademarks and copyrights
      Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain
      All trademarks and copyrights
      Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest. -- Mark Twain
      All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG.
      [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles
      on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG.
      [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles
      on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG.
      [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles
      © 1997-2004 OSTG.
      [ home | awards | contribute story | older articles

He'd post AC (5, Insightful)

SYFer (617415) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172924)

True math genius and the desire for money (and fame and babes, etc.) seem to be mutually exclusive traits and I think that's rather inspiring (and damned practical).

Take the case of Paul Erdos [wikipedia.org] who was essentially homeless, but published over 1500 papers and is considered one of the all time greats in the field.

Perelman just casually posted his solution out to the web in much the same way that some of the most brilliant posts on /. come form "anonymous cowards" sitting in their offices at MIT. What a god.

Re:He'd post AC (5, Funny)

Stevyn (691306) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172961)

It makes sense. Anyone that brilliant would see how pointless it is to worry about money. When will the rest of us learn? There's more to life than money.

Yeah, it's broadband.

Re:He'd post AC (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173074)

This observation of Stevyn and the answer to his question "When will the rest of us learn?" is well explained by Maslow's heirarchy of needs [wikipedia.org] . The was Maslow would havd put it is that this guy and other brillian people are 'self actualized' "A musician must make music, the artist must paint, a poet must write, if he is to be ultimately at peace with himself. What a man can be, he must be. This need we may call self-actualisation. (Motivation and Personality, 1954)". This happens after the various esteem needs, love needs, safety needs, and physiological needs are met. I think the average person gets stuck dealing with the "safety needs" (thus easy 9/11 manipulation). And the average reasonably-successful-slashdotter-guy gets stuck with the "esteem needs" stage aiming for Karma.

Only us self-actualized "Anonymous Coward" guys rise above this with insightful and informative posts such as this one without whoring for karma.

Re:He'd post AC (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173152)

And the average reasonably-successful-slashdotter-guy gets stuck with the "esteem needs" stage aiming for Karma.

But the geeks are all kept equal with hatchet, ax, and 50-point karma cap.

Re:He'd post AC (4, Insightful)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173085)

Anyone that brilliant would see how pointless it is to worry about money. When will the rest of us learn?

Oh please. What is this? The 60s? Apparently the guy is able to find enough time to work on these problems. That kind of freedom is what money buys. If he didn't have enough money to do that then it would suddenly become much more important.

"Money" is not some stack bills in your wallet. It represents some tangible effort that had value, and that value is now stored in a convenient form, ready to be exchanged for something else of value.

Re:He'd post AC (5, Interesting)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173202)

Apparently the guy is able to find enough time to work on these problems. That kind of freedom is what money buys.

It probably would only take $15K in the US to rent a small apartment in a cheap city and buy food for a year, allowing him to work on his problems. I think the point is that this guy may have been able to make a significant contribution to human knowledge and maybe centuries of notoriety with what it cost to live for a few years. Most of the rest of us would have taken the same amount of money and just dumped it into buying an upscale SUV.

Take a look at my cousin, he's broke, dont do shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173210)

The first investment worth making is in your own education.

The only other investment worth making is in the well being and betterment of others.

The first is only worth making if that is what it takes for you to realize the worth of the second.

Fight the good fight, that you may in good conscience be content among your fellows when all is won.

Re:He'd post AC (2, Insightful)

Stevyn (691306) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173268)

I appologize, my comment was mistaken.

I meant to say is that we'd all be happier if we didn't have to worry about money. However, a lot of people are living paycheck to paycheck and the little things in life (broadband, it's a joke) make the effort meaningful.

Your reply was dead on though, and insightful.

Re:He'd post AC (0, Flamebait)

russint (793669) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173103)

That statement is just a huge insult to anybody that doesn't have money.

Fuck you.

Re:He'd post AC (1)

halowolf (692775) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173183)

What would be nice I think would be if he is not interested in the money at all, then he could still take the money anyway and donate it to a charity.

There are more than enough needy causes that could do with such a boost to their funds.

Re:He'd post AC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173189)

Without money how would Slashdotters pay for their male prostitutes?

Re:He'd post AC (4, Insightful)

SYFer (617415) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173253)

We don't need to "learn" from this, really. it's perfectly OK in our society to take pride in our achievements and to try to gain from them. Unless you're truly self-actualized (as another poster astutely pointed out), we're all subject to certain realities and desires. After all, monetary reward can enhance your ability to do more good. As Hunter S. Thompson once said, "feed the body or the head will die." There's no shame in that. I find it interesting though, that some artists and scientists seem to exist on another plane altogether.

Re:He'd post AC (4, Funny)

spektr (466069) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173265)

There's more to life than money.

Yes, but he could reinvest the money into rubber bands and apples and solve thousands of Poincaré conjectures at once and thus gather even more money to buy apples for the hungry children in the world and rubber bands for their trousers. Well, if this business model isn't patented yet, of course...

Re:He'd post AC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172971)

Perelman just casually posted his solution out to the web in much the same way that some of the most brilliant posts on /. come form "anonymous cowards" sitting in their offices at MIT.

You're watching me aren't you?

Re:He'd post AC (1, Informative)

SYFer (617415) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173030)

Hmmmm. Is your IP 18.72.0.3?

Is Perelman a JEW? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173043)

His name sound very JEWISH.

Well is Perelman a KIKE? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173271)

I heard JEWS were pretty tricky, more so when it comes to money, and math helps you count it. That's why Kikes study math, to count the money they stole.

Re:He'd post AC (5, Insightful)

k98sven (324383) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173048)

Well.. I think it's kind of a general thing for all good Science too.

Einstein's original paper on Special relativity was named "On the electrodymanics of moving bodies".. It was not named "Revolutionary new discovery by me, Albert Einstein which will revolutionize the world of physics".

I guess there are several reasons for this.. one is simply manners. Boasting is unpolite. Scientific papers rarely have exciting titles, even when the results are exciting.

The second is of course, that a good scientist realizes the if a result may be revolutionary. A good scientist also always leaves room for doubt.

So the natural behaviour would of course to be careful and discreet, and not go confidently telling the world of your revolution until it has been verified. Otherwise, you'll end up with a lot of egg on your face.

Conversely, most scientists are highly sceptical of 'revolutionary' results which are announced in the press before being published. In fact, most pseudoscientists are very good at publicizing themselves and their 'revolutions', probably because they are totally convinced of their own theories, and are lacking the 'self-doubt' bit.

Re:He'd post AC (1)

Matt Moyer (763238) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173067)

Someone's been watching too much Good Will Hunting... :-)

He wouldn't care to post (1)

Janek Kozicki (722688) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173086)

oh well.. he wouldn't care to post here, I guess. There are more interesting things around to do, for a methamatical genius, than to hang around with nerds. (btw, I love his books)

Re:He'd post AC - why didn't you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173156)

... I think that's rather inspiring

Nice subject line... But apparently not inspiring enough for you to post AC. :)

Re:He'd post AC - why didn't you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173193)

This is one of those situations where it would have been more pretentious to post AC than to post under my own name (which I almost always do unless I'm faking a press release from a major company like Google). I am not worthy. I am also into money and babes. Go figger.

sorry i couldnt help myself (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172933)

weee first post!

sorry

If he doesn't want the money (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172947)

I'll be glad to take it.

Re:If he doesn't want the money (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172992)

They should give it to me so I can buy a 200,000,000 page Slashdot subscription.

Duplicate? (0, Troll)

Utopia (149375) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172953)

Seems like a dup of a story posted in Dec 2003

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01 /0 1/0035258&tid=134&tid=14

WHAT?! A dupe on Slashdot?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172964)

First the Poincare Conjecture is solved, then perhaps the first ever duplicate on Slashdot?! This is a history date.

Re:Duplicate? (4, Informative)

Disevidence (576586) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172965)

RTFA. He published another paper on it recently.

Re:Duplicate? (5, Funny)

EulerX07 (314098) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173149)

Think nothing is impossible? Try slamming a revolving door.

Place a 2 by 4 on the floor in the door.
Slam the revolving door.

Another impossible problem solved.

Re:Duplicate? (1)

Derg (557233) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173181)

isnt that slamming the door against the 2x4? not, slamming the door itself, as compared to a standard door, door against jam...

Re:Duplicate? (1)

Paleomacus (666999) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173220)

Depends on the definition of 'slamming' a door I would guess. Still...the 2x4 is probably against what you would call a door jam for a revolving door. It might even be arguable that a revolving door has a jam...

Great philosophical questions of our age :P

Re:Duplicate? (1)

John Courtland (585609) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173231)

Let the lock hang loose on the revolving door. When it turns and the pin falls into the floor - BOOM.

Re:Duplicate? (3, Funny)

pchan- (118053) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173192)

sure, but can you ski through it?

Re:Duplicate? (2, Informative)

terrymaster69 (792830) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173064)

According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] , his proof of this surfaced around 2002 and he was lecturing on it in 2003. I guess it's not new news per se, but a Millennium prize problem is a big deal no matter how you look at it.

Russian huh? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172955)

He sure wasn't Stalin.

Re:Russian huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173148)

Indeed. Stalin [wikipedia.org] was in fact a Georgian [wikipedia.org] , not a Russian [wikipedia.org] .

The "free" internet bubble never burst (5, Funny)

poofyhairguy82 (635386) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172967)

But there's a snag. He has simply posted his results on the Internet and left his peers to work out for themselves whether he is right -- something they are still struggling to do.

"There is good reason to believe that Perelman's approach is correct. But the trouble is, he won't talk to anybody about it and has shown no interest in the money," said Keith Devlin, Professor of Mathematics at Stanford University in California.



I'm always amazed how much free stuff is on the internet. Free million dollar solutions! Good luck with em!

Hey Grigori!! (-1, Redundant)

SeaDour (704727) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172977)

I'll take that one mil if you don't want it!

I'd post the solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172980)

but it would take too much time to fit it in this post before everyone's surfing at 1 or higher.

- Ferblankie

Math? (4, Informative)

hunterx11 (778171) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172982)

1,000,000 USD is about equal to 560,000 GBP, not 5.6 million GBP.

Re:Math? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173017)

Err.. when did anybody say it was 5.6m GBP..?

Re:Math? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173060)

RTFA.

Re:Math? (2, Funny)

fireman sam (662213) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173063)

the GBP is a new currency.

GBP (George Bush Pound) - The dollar unit associated with the search for WMDs.

Re:Math? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173130)

GBP (George Bush Pound) - The dollar unit associated with the search for WMDs.

I thought it was the "George Bush Pretzel"

Re:Math? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173135)

Perhaps our mathematician friend's next project could be lecturing journalists and editors on how to correctly do currency conversions?

Re:Math? (1)

rand()0 (810986) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173223)

Now why would he do that? He gets 10 times the money otherwise.

Look at his method for solving this!!! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10172988)

He's trying to integrate homeomorphic convergence using a Baxter-Bates supermodality, which Krause clearly explained is impossible for T(s) in a non-linear progression. Fantastic thought process on this complex differential geometric problem.

Just kidding! I have no clue what the hell this is. I got lost after the word conjecture.

Re:Look at his method for solving this!!! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173061)

And if you hadn't added that last paragraph, you'd be +3, Informative by now.

Re:Look at his method for solving this!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173094)

And if you hadn't been a smartass, you'd realize that you had been duped with a bunch of mathematical nonsense and your +1 insightful would be -1 troll

Re:Look at his method for solving this!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173107)

Sigh. That was the point.

Re:Look at his method for solving this!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173119)

my bad. damn, your right pal.

Re:Look at his method for solving this!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173100)

So can someone who _does_ understand what's being talked about translate matheese-to-english and summarize in a way we can understand?

Thanks in advance.

Re:Look at his method for solving this!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173113)

No. :)

Re:Look at his method for solving this!!! (1)

Zone-MR (631588) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173110)

So my astrophysics bullshit generator at http://zone-mr.ath.cx/?act=bullshit [zone-mr.ath.cx] consistently generates $1 million explanations?

Damn... (4, Funny)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 10 years ago | (#10172997)

I read all the links, and I'm pretty sure they were all in english, but I didn't understand a word of it. No wonder all the mathematicians are nuts.

(I wonder if this is what some of my non-engineering clients think of my work sometimes)

Yes but... (5, Funny)

gbulmash (688770) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173003)

His answer to the problem was "42".

- Greg

Re:Yes but... (3, Funny)

dynayellow (106690) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173015)

Makes sense, as I have no idea what the question is.

Re:Yes but... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173122)

Makes sense, as I have no idea what the question is.

Hm... Let's see what the article tells us about it:

If we stretch a rubber band around the surface of an apple, then we can shrink it down to a point by moving it slowly, without tearing it and without allowing it to leave the surface. On the other hand, if we imagine that the same rubber band has somehow been stretched in the appropriate direction around a doughnut, then there is no way of shrinking it to a point without breaking either the rubber band or the doughnut. We say the surface of the apple is "simply connected," but that the surface of the doughnut is not. Poincaré, almost a hundred years ago, knew that a two dimensional sphere is essentially characterized by this property of simple connectivity, and asked the corresponding question for the three dimensional sphere (the set of points in four dimensional space at unit distance from the origin). This question turned out to be extraordinarily difficult, and mathematicians have been struggling with it ever since.

Ah. Poincaré understood to ask a simple question like "what is six multiplied by seven" in such a profoundly stupid way that it puzzled the world ever since if and why the answer was 42...

Re:Yes but... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173054)

My answer is, "You're a cunt."

Thanks for recycling Slashdot's oldest cliche for the 10^1000th time.

We're all a little poorer for your efforts.

Re:Yes but... (1)

rand()0 (810986) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173250)

But see it actually makes sense, unless you think it originally showed up in hitchhiker's guide.

Re:Yes but... (1)

HoldmyCauls (239328) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173131)

Aw, I was going to guess that!

Well, at least the Russkies are good at math... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173006)

...because they're really awful at hostage rescues.

Re:Well, at least the Russkies are good at math... (-1, Troll)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173022)

Well, if the Religion of Peace(tm) members hadn't been shooting the kids in the back perhaps it would have gone better. I will leave the discussion of the torture of the kids for another post.

Re:Well, at least the Russkies are good at math... (0, Troll)

FiReaNGeL (312636) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173032)

Who in Hell modded this insightfull? Flamebait or 'moronic joker' would be more appropriate...

Re:Well, at least the Russkies are good at math... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173214)

Flamebait it may be, but it is true. Russia's elite special forces were called into action, but were grossly unprepared and unorganized.

Re:Well, at least the Russkies are good at math... (0, Flamebait)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173235)

Who would have thought that those that worship islam would kill kids by shooting them in the back and laugh at them as the tortured them.

After all islam is the Religion of Peace (TM)

Re:Well, at least the Russkies are good at math... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173102)

Well at least they can rescue hostages! There were 1000 people in that school and only 350 died. Everyone could have died if they did nothing.

$1 million USD? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173007)

From the article:

A reclusive Russian may have solved one of the world's toughest mathematics problems and stands to win $1 million (560 million pounds) -- but he doesn't appear to care.

Heh. Last I checked, $1 million dollars was not quite equal to 560 million (British) pounds. (560 thousand, sure ...)

In an article on mathematics. Of all things.

Re:$1 million USD? (5, Funny)

bullitB (447519) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173280)

That's a British million. A million is only 10^3 over there.

The Whocares conjecture (5, Funny)

Neo-Rio-101 (700494) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173013)

Whocarés Conjecture If we stretch a g-string around the surface of somebody's buttocks, then we can shrink it down to a point by moving it slowly, without tearing it and without allowing it to leave the surface. On the other hand, if we imagine that the same g-string has somehow been stretched in the appropriate direction around someone's face, then there is no way of shrinking it to a point without breaking either the g-string or suffocating the person. We say the surface of the buttocks are "simply connected," but that the surface of the person's face is not. Whocares knew almost hundred years ago, knew that a well shaped pair of cheeks is essentially characterized by this property of simple connectivity, and asked the corresponding question for the rest fo the people still reading this, as to why they were doing so. This question turned out to be extraordinarily difficult, and slashdotters have been struggling with it ever since.

An apple is simple connected a donut is not. (2, Funny)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173191)

Therefor a butt is not simply connected.

However you stated 'We say the surface of the buttocks are "simply connected"' buy that do you mean to ignore all the plumbing associated with the butt while recognizing the thru and thru nature of the mouth/nose hole.

I NEED more information. I'm strangely fascenated by the topography of butts. Perhaps I can get a grant.

Problems with the Millenium Problems (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173018)

Sorry but this is a useless problem to solve. And I'm right cause guess what I dont see anything practical coming of it. I understand that it's supposed to generate "good mathematics" that will supposedly help us solve practical problems eventually .. but why not offer the reward for actual practical mathematics. For example solving the N-Body problem or prime number factorization. I agree with P=NP being a millenium problem ... cause it has direct practical benefit.

Re:Problems with the Millenium Problems (5, Funny)

jericho4.0 (565125) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173088)

You're an idiot. The Poincare Conjecture has direct application to streching rubber bands around apples.

I'm joking, but you're still an idiot.

Riemann hypothesis reportadly also solved (4, Interesting)

jm91509 (161085) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173038)

According to the Guardian [guardian.co.uk] another clever Maths dude has proposed a solution to another of the 7 "million dollar" problems.

This particular problem has big implications for online cryptography as it deals with the distribution of prime numbers. Apparantly.

(I'm no mathematics person BTW.)

Re:Riemann hypothesis reportadly also solved (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173136)

That's a great link, with a wonderful human-readable summary of the 7 problems.

For those too lazy to click:

Seven baffling pillars of wisdom

1 Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture Euclid geometry for the 21st century, involving things called abelian points and zeta functions and both finite and infinite answers to algebraic equations

2 Poincaré conjecture The surface of an apple is simply connected. But the surface of a doughnut is not. How do you start from the idea of simple connectivity and then characterise space in three dimensions?

3 Navier-Stokes equation The answers to wave and breeze turbulence lie somewhere in the solutions to these equations

4 P vs NP problem Some problems are just too big: you can quickly check if an answer is right, but it might take the lifetime of a universe to solve it from scratch. Can you prove which questions are truly hard, which not?

5 Riemann hypothesis Involving zeta functions, and an assertion that all "interesting" solutions to an equation lie on a straight line. It seems to be true for the first 1,500 million solutions, but does that mean it is true for them all?

6 Hodge conjecture At the frontier of algebra and geometry, involving the technical problems of building shapes by "gluing" geometric blocks together

7 Yang-Mills and Mass gap A problem that involves quantum mechanics and elementary particles. Physicists know it, computers have simulated it but nobody has found a theory to explain it

MILLENNIUM (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173057)

Why do people insist on spelling millennium with only one n?

like the plastic 6 inch blond says... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173068)

math is hard

It's spelled "millennium" (0, Troll)

non-registered (639880) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173075)

That's all.

Re:It's spelled "millennium" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173200)

Don't you mean, "Willinium"?

Wake me... (0, Flamebait)

Capt'n Hector (650760) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173082)

Wake me when someone verifies his work. I can claim to solve anything, but it doesn't mean much unless the community says I'm right. Right off the bat it seems fishy: no journal submission, just a web post? No referee? And he's not answering questions about his work? He's either a genius or a nutcase, possibly both.

Re:Wake me... (3, Informative)

RedWizzard (192002) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173282)

Wake me when someone verifies his work. I can claim to solve anything, but it doesn't mean much unless the community says I'm right. Right off the bat it seems fishy: no journal submission, just a web post? No referee? And he's not answering questions about his work? He's either a genius or a nutcase, possibly both.
The claim has been around for a while. From the referenced MathWorld article:
Almost exactly a year later, Perelman's results appear to be much more robust. While it will be months before mathematicians can digest and verify the details of the proof, mathematicians familiar with Perelman's work describe it as well thought out and expect that it will prove difficult to locate any significant mistakes.
That was in April 2003. It's now over a year later again and it hasn't been disproven.

The Millenium Problems (5, Informative)

shadowmatter (734276) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173087)

Since a great deal of discussion and awe comes up anytime one of the millenium problems is mentioned (solved?) on Slashdot, I'd just like to say that any layman interested in learning more about the millenium problems should run to his/her library/bookstore and pick up The Millennium Problems: The Seven Greatest Unsolved Mathematical Puzzles of Our Time [amazon.com] . Although, perhaps, for the layman, the end may become a bit tricky (the problems are explained simply in order of increasing difficulty), it's a book worth sticking with, and ultimately worth a read.

- sm

Re:The Millenium Problems (0, Troll)

Disevidence (576586) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173154)

Read this [slashdot.org]

the poincare conjecture my thoughts (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173097)

So this is my 690th post and..the poincare conjecture is definitely fresh and funky. I know this is rather funky chicken to you readers. Thank you for reading me talk about the poincare conjecture or at least it seeems to me. My feeelings and the poincare conjecture are not reallly related. Please commment on my mother or the poincare conjecture here for me to read.Most of the time I think What you think? Do you love the poincare conjecture?. Today Lately I beeen speaking to Keith about the poincare conjecture. So this is how it is.. Perhaps I could discusss friends with my friend Justin H.The poincare conjecture is what i want to talk about here. Today my groans and the poincare conjecture is what I rather apppreciate to mention today. It is best to ignore my yelps of pleasure. My English knowledge and the poincare conjecture are not reallly related. I like friends. I somewhat like the poincare conjecture!!!!!! Most of the time I think his feeelings is intently the best there is as welll. I like you readers!!! Tomorrrow I am going to think about your theories on the poincare conjecture. I apppreciate you readers!!!!!! While I am talk about the poincare conjecture I wannna say they are FRESH AND ORIGINAL alll the time Whats up with that?!!!!!!!! Many times the poincare conjecture are fullly very pleasant usuallly.

i definitely can recommend slashdot to you.... i gotta say.. and they are one of the best with my my english skills too. please comment on the smell of my farting or slashdot here for me to read.

Re:the poincare conjecture my thoughts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173167)

i rate this troll 7/10. a good attempt.

Re:the poincare conjecture my thoughts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173198)

Actually, I'll come clean. I wrote a system to create fake weblogs. Unfortunately it seems to do some things which I don't fully understand (bugs) and it comes up with some really bizarre combinations of phrases I didn't even program in. So anyway.. there's actually a blog running which this thing posts to on a regular basis, but I thought it'd be funny to see what it had to say about this story. Not very much it seems..

Just like Linux configuration forums (2, Insightful)

Brento (26177) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173104)

But there's a snag. He has simply posted his results on the Internet and left his peers to work out for themselves whether he is right -- something they are still struggling to do.

Okay, so tell me how this is any different from every l33t user that tells me how to get my dual flat panel setup working under Xandros without editing the X files manually? Sounds like these kids just tried their hands at mathematics, too.

Mr. President... (2, Funny)

cerberus4696 (765520) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173120)

...we must not have a poincare conjecture gap!

Hopefully he has better luck than de Branges (4, Informative)

DeepRedux (601768) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173132)

A few months ago Louis de Branges published his proof of the Riemann Hypothesis [purdue.edu] on the internet. This is also a Millennium problem. Apparently, no mathematician has read it [lrb.co.uk] .

It is not that de Branges is unqualified: he settled Bieberbach's Conjecture [wolfram.com] . Interestingly, much of the validation of de Branges work on Bieberbach's Conjecture was done by a team at the Steklov Institute, referred to in the MathWorld link in the article.

abstract- not complicated at all! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173145)

This is a technical paper, which is a continuation of math.DG/0211159. Here we construct Ricci flow with surgeries and verify most of the assertions, made in section 13 of that e-print; the exceptions are (1) the statement that manifolds that can collapse with local lower bound on sectional curvature are graph manifolds - this is deferred to a separate paper, since the proof has nothing to do with the Ricci flow, and (2) the claim on the lower bound for the volume of maximal horns and the smoothness of solutions from some time on, which turned out to be unjustified and, on the other hand, irrelevant for the other conclusions.

One thing he overlooked... (3, Funny)

HoldmyCauls (239328) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173151)

Solving a Millenium Problem carries a reward of $1M, but apparently Perelman isn't interested...
He does realize that's as good as *money*, right???

Attn: Slashdot Editors: Two Typos (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173209)

You spelled "Millennium Problem" wrong twice!

Wake me up when it's peer reviewed and accepted (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173215)

I'm tired of seeing these 'please make me famous even though I didn't really prove it' threads. The little boy has cried wolf too many times. We don't care unless it's really solved.

Editors, I'm talking to you.

Racist title (4, Insightful)

Fjornir (516960) | more than 10 years ago | (#10173233)

I can't believe slashdot would run a story with that title. "Perelman May Have Solved Poincare Conjecture" would have been much more dignified. You would never see "Muppet May Have Solved Poincare Conjecture" would you? Please, Perelman is a mathematician first, Russian second.

Re:Racist title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#10173279)

Well, "Ernie May Have Solved Poincare Conjecture" would be confusing.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?