tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6555947.post109145536040409908..comments2014-01-12T10:46:48.153-07:00Comments on The Geomblog: Proofs and ReputationsSuresh Venkatasubramanianhttps://plus.google.com/112165457714968997350noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6555947.post-1122430650655110992005-07-26T20:17:00.000-06:002005-07-26T20:17:00.000-06:00CAN ANYBODY HELP ME FINDING RECENT NEWS (TODAY IS ...CAN ANYBODY HELP ME FINDING RECENT NEWS (TODAY IS <BR/>28 JULY 2005!!!) ON PROF. LOUIS DE BRANGES AND <BR/>HIS DEMONSTRATION OF THE RIEMANN HYPOTHESIS?<BR/>NO NEW INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND ON INTERNET...<BR/>I AM DESPERATE FOR NEWS.<BR/>BEST WISHES.<BR/>PROF. MARIANELA M. <BR/><BR/><A></A><A></A>Posted by<A><B> </B></A><A HREF="http://geomblog.blogspot.com/2004/08/proofs-and-reputations.html" REL="nofollow" TITLE="DIABOLIK21 at FREESURF dot CH">MARTIGNONI MARIANELA</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6555947.post-1095800053686966892004-09-21T14:54:00.000-06:002004-09-21T14:54:00.000-06:00Hmmm.. the math joke you heard seem to be derived ...Hmmm.. the math joke you heard seem to be derived <br />from Hardy's unique "travel insurance" - before <br />embarking on a ship journey, he'd telegraph to let <br />his hosts know that he'd solved the RH. His logic<br />was that God wouldn't allow eternal posthumous <br />glory for Hardy and would hence keep the journey<br />safe :)<br /><br />Saty RaghavacharyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6555947.post-1091628646867830382004-08-04T08:10:00.000-06:002004-08-04T08:10:00.000-06:00The reason the mathematical community is slow to a...The reason the mathematical community is slow to accept the de Brange proof is two-fold.<br /><br />First, in 1998 there was a paper showing that the techniques being used by de Brange were flawed (found <A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/r?http%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2Fmath.NT%2F9812166"> here</A>) Of course, 1998 is a long time ago, so he may have found something new to modify his approach.<br /><br />Second, he is considerd a maverick. He did prove the Bieberbach Conjecture, however (and this is according the mathematicians of the time) cried wolf on a number of occasions.<br /><br />Finally, it should be remembered, that he has not actually published his proof for the world to see. In fact, without the press-release, no one would even know he is close. Compare this to Perelman's work on Poincare, which was immediately made public.<br /><br />All in all, this reminds me of a math joke I once heard. When an older professor was asked why the name of his talk was "On the proof of the Riemann Hypothesis" for an up coming math conference, he admitted the following: He did not have a proof, nor was he even going to talk about the Riemann Hypothesis, but the title was in case something horrible happened on his way to the conference. Everyone would always wonder if he did...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6555947.post-1091574473755179402004-08-03T17:07:00.000-06:002004-08-03T17:07:00.000-06:00Yes. thanks for pointing that out.Yes. thanks for pointing that out.Sureshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15898357513326041822noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6555947.post-1091574289066947652004-08-03T17:04:00.000-06:002004-08-03T17:04:00.000-06:00Shouldn't that be "...but it cannot be _zero_", as...Shouldn't that be "...but it cannot be _zero_", as opposed to 'nonzero'?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com