### Author Topic: 杂文：从庞加莱猜想说开去  (Read 15136 times)

#### 万精油

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1831
##### 杂文：从庞加莱猜想说开去
« on: 八月 28, 2006, 03:10:04 pm »

－－万精油－－

ＳＴＥＶＥ ＳＭＡＬＥ解决了高维中Ｎ＞＝５的情况。后来ＦＲＥＥＭＡＮ又解决了
Ｎ＝４的情况。他们两人都为此得了数学界的最高奖菲尔兹奖。绕了一圈最后又回到了
Ｎ＝３这块硬骨头。

Ｎ＞＝５），条件比较多，空间的限制也比较多，唯一确定就比较容易。在维数不大不

ＲＩＣＣＩ流走的也是偏微分方程的路子。在大家不知道如何往前时，ＲＩＣＣＩ流给

ＴＯＮ猜想。ＴＨＵＲＳＴＯＮ把三维流形分为八类，其中一类就是球面。解决了它就

ＭＡＮ是不世奇才，牛人一个。据说他拒绝接受菲尔兹奖。关于他的故事可以另写一大

Ｐ的证明，他说他认为Ｐ的证明可以ＨＯＬＤ ＷＡＴＥＲ。也就是说证明可行，即使

Ｈ也可以几年不理，让别人去走。现在走通了说明Ｈ的思路正确。当然，这只是我的很

３０％的。我个人觉得比较公平的份量应该是１０％左右。然而，由于丘成桐的抢功，

2006.8.28

« Last Edit: 十一月 13, 2007, 01:32:48 pm by 万精油 »

#### idiot94

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 484
##### Re: 从庞加莱猜想说开去
« Reply #1 on: 八月 29, 2006, 02:00:43 pm »

In general, the men of lower intelligence won out. Afraid of of their own shortcomings ... they boldly moved into action. Their enemies, ...  thought there was no need to take by action what they could win by their brains. Thucydides, History

#### fzy

• Hero Member
• Posts: 520
##### Re: 从庞加莱猜想说开去
« Reply #2 on: 八月 29, 2006, 02:10:27 pm »
I agree with the professor's evaluation of Cao and Zhu's work. The problem is Yau. It was not an issue but he made it an issue. Now it looks like the two Chinese mathematician will get less credit than they deserve due to Yau's manipulation.

#### a NYer

• Guest
##### Re: 从庞加莱猜想说开去
« Reply #3 on: 八月 29, 2006, 04:24:38 pm »
This is one of the most balanced and informative article. Thank you, professor. I think Yau really cares about the math development in China and a little too earnest. Like father to son, he pushed for credit, not necessarily for himself, but for Zu and Cao.

#### 万精油

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1831
##### Re: 从庞加莱猜想说开去
« Reply #4 on: 八月 30, 2006, 01:08:20 pm »
Quote
I agree with the professor's evaluation of Cao and Zhu's work. The problem is Yau. It was not an issue but he made it an issue. Now it looks like the two Chinese mathematician will get less credit than they deserve due to Yau's manipulation.

Exactly. That's part of the reason that motivated me writing this article. When people want to correct Yau's exageration, they over done it and made Cao-Zhu's work seemed like worthless. I re-edit my article and added a couple of sentences to stress that point.

Quote
I think Yau really cares about the math development in China and a little too earnest. Like father to son, he pushed for credit, not necessarily for himself, but for Zu and Cao.

Yau pushed for the credit, not trying to compete with Perelman, but to compete with other two teams of people who also did the "verifying" work (Tian Gang is among one of them). To do this, i.e. to make Cao-Zhu's work look more important than it is, he had to push down Perelman, which was not a wise move. It re-bounced, and ended up hurting Cao-Zhu.

#### dwy

• Guest
##### ZT: 丁伟岳: 庞加莱的困惑
« Reply #5 on: 九月 02, 2006, 10:02:15 am »
【按：丁伟岳为北京大学数学学院教授、中国科学院院士】

6月3日，新华网发布了一条惊人的消息 ---- 百年数学难题被破解 中国科

使我惊讶的是，丘成桐教授是几何分析公认的世界级权威，他不会不知道当

此后国内媒体的欢呼和层出不穷的宣传报道已不用我在此回顾了，因为大家

国外媒体的报道则迟了许多，而且显然同国内媒体大相径庭。7月21日，华

Grigori Perelman所证明。其中最为令人吃惊的是引用了美国著名数学家Milnor

“完全证明”这件事说成是在成果归属的问题上扔出了一把“猴子的扳手”（故

8月22日国际数学界大会的开幕式上，国际数学家联盟宣布授予佩雷尔曼大

关于三个月来围绕庞加莱猜想发生的主要一些事情就是如此。因为国外媒体

但是事情看来还没有完全结束。对于佩雷尔曼证明了庞加莱猜想这件事好像

8月18日，《科学时报》记者王丹红在题为“数学证明：中国数学家的贡献

她接着说：“仔细检索国内媒体的相关报道，确实是五花八门，一些报道极

“我国数学家朱熹平教授与旅美数学家曹怀东教授运用Hamilton和Perelman理论，

又是同一个王丹红采访了与丘成桐一起参加新闻发布会的杨乐教授，在8月
25日《科学时报》的文章中说，“新闻发布会后，有媒体报道，杨乐在谈到庞加

[6]
显然，杨乐是在把“30%”这个说法“归功于”丘成桐。

深入考证一下，我们发现第一次把这种说法公之于众的是《新京报》。在
《新京报》6月5日的一篇报道中这样说， “据数学家杨乐介绍，如果按百分之

21日该报记者对丘成桐的采访录中，丘说：“整体来看，中国科学家的贡献应该

然而，刚刚从国际数学家大会传回的消息说，曹怀东在马德里答记者问时说，
“不幸的是，丘成桐教授的观点被媒体所歪曲。据我所知，丘教授从来没有，也

“全程录音”，否则可是麻烦了。

在回答记者时，曹怀东还说：“我的看法是佩雷尔曼完全应当获得菲尔兹奖。

对于事态的进一步发展，我们还需拭目以待。
[1] http://news.sina.com.cn/o/2006-05-30/04349062553s.shtml
[2]
http://news3.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/2006-06/03/content_4641469.htm
[3] http://nst.pku.edu.cn/print.php?sid=6207
[4] http://cyybase.com/shownews.asp?id=192
[5] http://www.sciencetimes.com.cn/col1/article.htm1?id=77763
[6] http://www.cas.ac.cn/html/Dir/2006/08/25/14/35/08.htm
[7] http://news.xinhuanet.com/st/2006-06/05/content_4645890.htm
[8] http://tech.tom.com/2006-06-21/04BI/85962849.html
[9] http://www.icm2006.org/dailynews/dailynews29.pdf

(XYS20060902)