#1
Apr1703, 08:30 PM

P: n/a

The New York Times did an article today about a Russian mathemetician who claims to have proved the Poincare Hypothesis. In good Andrew Wiles fashion his proof is actually much further reaching results with the actuall proof of Poincare's Hypothesis dropping out of the larger result. Thought you might want to check it out: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/15/science/15MATH.html




#2
Apr1703, 08:39 PM

P: 499

excellent



#3
Apr1703, 09:44 PM

P: n/a

This article talked a little about Andrew Wiles proof of FLT too. It mentioned that a flaw was found in it and that he worked for months to fix it with one of his students. I've heard all sorts of things about Andrew Wiles's proof. So maybe some one can set the record straight for me. Is Andrew Wiles's proof of FLT considered valid today, or is it still thought of as flawed?



#4
Apr1803, 12:55 AM

P: n/a

Poincare Hypothesis Proof (Maybe?)
it's valid today. he did fix it.



Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Proof of the Riemann Hypothesis  General Math  15  
Proof of Poincare Recurrence Theorem  Classical Physics  3  
Hypothesis in proof  Calculus & Beyond Homework  14  
Proof of Riemann Hypothesis?  Linear & Abstract Algebra  2 