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
SUMMARY

The Poincaré Conjecture, proposed by Grigori Perelman, is widely believed to have been proven, although Perelman has not published his results in any formal journals, which affects his eligibility for the Clay Millennium Prize. Discussions indicate that while the proof is considered valid by many mathematicians, it remains under review and has not been officially confirmed. Perelman's unconventional approach to sharing his proof, primarily through personal circulation rather than publication, has led to speculation about his motivations, including a disinterest in monetary rewards. For further insights, readers can refer to the review published in the American Mathematical Society Bulletin.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of topology and manifold theory
  • Familiarity with the Clay Millennium Prize and its criteria
  • Knowledge of mathematical proof validation processes
  • Ability to interpret advanced mathematical literature
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Grigori Perelman's approach to the Poincaré Conjecture
  • Study the implications of the Clay Millennium Prize criteria on mathematical proofs
  • Explore the review of the Poincaré Conjecture in the American Mathematical Society Bulletin
  • Learn about the process of peer review in mathematical publishing
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, researchers in topology, students of advanced mathematics, and anyone interested in the history and implications of the Poincaré Conjecture.

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