Another Millennium problem down?

After Grigori Perelman‘s proof of the Poincaré conjecture and Penny Smith’s failed attempt at the Navier-Stokes equation comes another claim that a Millennium problem of the Clay Mathematics Institute has been solved. This time it’s the Riemann hypothesis — and it’s a disproof.

Here is the arxiv submission by Tribikram Pati, a respected mathematician from Allahabad. I certainly can’t evaluate the paper, but from what I have heard of the author, this must be at least a very serious attempt. According to the Clay Institute rules, even if Prof Pati’s attempt is correct, it will need to be published in a peer-reviewed journal and then evaluated by the community over two years (so Perelman, too, needs to wait — if he’s interested at all.)

The Riemann hypothesis was also one of David Hilbert’s problems for the twentieth century, and the only one to appear both on his list and on the Clay Institute’s.

Advertisements
Leave a comment

12 Comments

  1. Hi,are there any links discussing the proposed solution in general terms. also is there a biography of professor pati online.thanks,

    Reply
  2. Anonymous

     /  March 14, 2007

    Hi,

    are there any links discussing the proposed solution in general terms. also is there a biography of professor pati online.

    thanks,

    Reply
  3. Anonymous

     /  March 15, 2007

    sort of (indian-type) biography of Prof. Pati is here:
    https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/pipermail/ornet/2006-July/011372.html

    -vani

    Reply
  4. I’m sure the links will come up… I’m not a mathematician (let alone a number theorist) myself. The paper looked kind of straightforward though, not terribly long, one just has to work through it. If there are any errors I suspect they’ll be extremely subtle. The link that vani provides suggests Prof Pati has been sitting on his results (no doubt, trying to convince himself it’s bulletproof) for several months, if not longer.

    Reply
  5. Rahul

     /  March 15, 2007

    I’m sure the links will come up… I’m not a mathematician (let alone a number theorist) myself. The paper looked kind of straightforward though, not terribly long, one just has to work through it. If there are any errors I suspect they’ll be extremely subtle. The link that vani provides suggests Prof Pati has been sitting on his results (no doubt, trying to convince himself it’s bulletproof) for several months, if not longer.

    Reply
  6. theres no $ 1 million award for disproof of RH http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannHypothesis.htmlsince the paper is small and many of the results are known it shud take less time for a flaw to come out if there is any.

    Reply
  7. issan

     /  March 16, 2007

    theres no $ 1 million award for disproof of RH
    http://mathworld.wolfram.com/RiemannHypothesis.html
    since the paper is small and many of the results are known it shud take less time for a flaw to come out if there is any.

    Reply
  8. Issan — that’s not what the rules page says. It only casts doubt in the case where a counterexample may leave open a slightly modified form of the hypothesis — but they’re probably happy if it “effectively resolves the problem”. Note that Prof Pati’s disproof is a reductio ad absurdum, not a counterexample.You are right that the paper looks like it should be easy to check. Let’s wait and see.

    Reply
  9. Rahul

     /  March 16, 2007

    Issan — that’s not what the rules page says. It only casts doubt in the case where a counterexample may leave open a slightly modified form of the hypothesis — but they’re probably happy if it “effectively resolves the problem”. Note that Prof Pati’s disproof is a reductio ad absurdum, not a counterexample.

    You are right that the paper looks like it should be easy to check. Let’s wait and see.

    Reply
  10. yeah that is possible of course!Some of my teachers must be having a look at the proof here at ISI so we hope to get some report very soon!Issan

    Reply
  11. Anonymous

     /  March 16, 2007

    yeah that is possible of course!
    Some of my teachers must be having a look at the proof here at ISI so we hope to get some report very soon!
    Issan

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s