So, I'm not sure why you believe the paper to be unreliable? The P=NP problem has a certain family resemblance to pseudomathematics: it's fairly easy to understand for someone without much training, it would have a sweeping generality of result if solved, and certain aspects of it are highly counterintuitive. But it's also verging on common knowledge, at least in its broadest outlines. That's my first question, I suppose.
But you also bring up an interesting question about epistemic justification: if you think the paper is suspect, how would you confirm your suspicions on livejournal? That paper's written by Avi Wigderson. A profesor of math. At the Institute for Advanced Study. His CV is nineteen pages long. Who are you going to believe?
I have a great idea for a TV program. You get these 12 mathematicians in a house. They all try to solve a famous problem, and they each produce a paper.
The public get to vote off the mathematician they don't like each week, until there's a winner. The winner's proof is the correct one.
This way all the problems that the Clay Institute have listed could be solved. They could even use the 1 million dollar prize from the Clay Institute to help fund the program.
No. I just thought it was... perhaps a little over exuberant in tone. But, that's part of what made it so enjoyable to read, so I'm not complaining.
It's not a paper with new results, just a summary of recent work, and I wanted to know if it was being fair. It does try to make the case that work is the area is just about the most important thing happening in mathematics today.
But you also bring up an interesting question about epistemic justification: if you think the paper is suspect, how would you confirm your suspicions on livejournal? That paper's written by Avi Wigderson. A profesor of math. At the Institute for Advanced Study. His CV is nineteen pages long. Who are you going to believe?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I have a great idea for a TV program. You get these 12 mathematicians in a house. They all try to solve a famous problem, and they each produce a paper.
The public get to vote off the mathematician they don't like each week, until there's a winner. The winner's proof is the correct one.
This way all the problems that the Clay Institute have listed could be solved. They could even use the 1 million dollar prize from the Clay Institute to help fund the program.
Reply
Reply
Reply
It's not a paper with new results, just a summary of recent work, and I wanted to know if it was being fair. It does try to make the case that work is the area is just about the most important thing happening in mathematics today.
Reply
Leave a comment