Poincare Hypothesis Proof (Maybe?)

In summary, The New York Times published an article about a Russian mathematician who claims to have proved the Poincare Hypothesis. The proof also includes further reaching results, with the proof of Poincare's Hypothesis being a part of it. The article also mentions Andrew Wiles' proof of FLT, which had a flaw that was later fixed with the help of one of his students. Wiles' proof is now considered valid.
  • #1
climbhi
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
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
excellent
 
  • #3
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
it's valid today. he did fix it.
 
Back
Top