Has the Poincaré Conjecture Been Proven? A Review of the Proposed Proof

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Icebreaker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conjecture Poincare
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of the proof of the Poincaré Conjecture proposed by Grigori Perelman, including questions about its publication status and eligibility for the Clay Millennium Prize. Participants explore the implications of the proof's circulation among mathematicians and the lack of formal publication.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether Perelman has claimed the Clay Millennium Prize, noting that the articles suggest uncertainty with the word "may."
  • There is a suggestion that Perelman has not published his proof in any journals, which affects his eligibility for the prize.
  • One participant speculates that Perelman may not be motivated by financial gain, as he has previously indicated a lack of interest in publicity.
  • Another participant expresses belief that the proof is correct and mentions that it is likely under review before publication.
  • Participants share links to articles and reviews related to the conjecture and proposed proof, but some express frustration over the lack of detailed information in those sources.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the proof or its publication status, with multiple competing views and uncertainties remaining throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions about Perelman's motivations and the implications of his proof not being published. The discussion reflects a dependency on the interpretations of various articles and the lack of direct information from Perelman himself.

Physics news on Phys.org
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/01/07/math.mystery.ap/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It simply says "may", it still isn't confirmed whether he claimed the Clay prize.
 
Icebreaker said:
It simply says "may", it still isn't confirmed whether he claimed the Clay prize.

Right. I just thought in case you hadn't seen that article, that you would like too.
 
Last edited:
why don't you read the articels and find out?
 
I have read it; one of them is a year old, and the other is two.
 
"Russian may have solved great math mystery"

Heh. After over a year I still think that is the dumbest title I've ever seen
 
if you have read it, can you tell us if you believe the proof is correct?
 
  • #10
The articles themselves do not offer any details about the proof.
 
  • #11
do you mean the proof is not published?
 
  • #12
As far as I can see (from the articles), Perelman did not publish his results in any journals, and only circulated them to mathematicians whom he knows. Consequently, he is not technically eligible for the Clay prize, but there is word that Clay may eventually make an exception in his case. That was last year; I haven't any more recent news.
 
  • #13
He probably is not doing it for the money though. Maybe that's why he's doing it the way he is doing it.
 
  • #14
He definitely isn't doing it for money and isn't publicising it either. He had declared so earlier or so i read in one of the articles once. (Quite contrary to Mr De Branges :p). The proof is believed to be correct and i think it would be under controlled review for some more time, before it is published.

You may read a nice review of the conjecture and the proposed proof here,
http://www.ams.org/bull/2005-42-01/S0273-0979-04-01045-6/S0273-0979-04-01045-6.pdf

I daresay, i understand that (i mean its all greek to me). But still a nice read, if u are to able to read "Unabridged Dictionary" as "Under the bridge with dick and harry". :)

-- AI
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
17K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K