GS Chandy
Posts:
7,941
From:
Hyderabad, Mumbai/Bangalore, India
Registered:
9/29/05


Re: hilbert's third problem
Posted:
Aug 9, 2013 4:21 AM


Further my post dt. Aug 8, 2013 12:38 AM (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9188481) where I had provided a link to the fascinating New Yorker article "Manifold Destiny" on mathematician Grigori Perelman (below my signature).
Perelman a few years ago had created something of a stir amongst mathematicians by setting "Poincare's Conjecture" to rest in a series of pathbreaking papers. (The 'Poincare Conjecture' has some connections with the 'Hilbert Problems').
Perelman had then gone on to create a HUGE stir in the minds of the public at large by refusing BOTH the $ 1 million prize offered by the Clay Mathematics Institute for the feat AND the Field's Prize, which is widely considered to be the "Mathematician's Nobel". (It was certainly the first time one of the Clay Awards had been refused by anyone, and I believe it was also the first time that the Fields Prize had been refused). Thus, Perelman surely entered himself into the list of great geniuses who are also 'great eccentrics'.
The New Yorker had later published an interesting 'page turner' about a book that was one of Grigori Perelman's childhood favorites, "Physics for Everyone"  see New Yorker page turner "Physics for Reclusive Russian Mathematical Geniuses" at http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2008/05/physicsforrec.html. I observe in passing that this was a book I too had read with real delight when I was a boy.
(By the way  and ESPECIALLY for Professor Wayne Bishop and others of his mind who may like to promote false ideas  that book will NOT help to make you, or me or anyone else, anything like Grigori Perelman, notwithstanding the 'clever' New Yorker blurb about the book.
("Physics for Everyone" MAY well help stimulate some interest in physics, which in turn MAY help stimulate some interest in mathematics  but becoming or being 'comparable to' Grigori Perelman is quite another matter [as I'm sure even Professor Wayne Bishop realizes full well].
(There is some interesting correspondence on "being comparable to Perelman"  which readers may well find at least amusing  between Professor Bishop and the undersigned at:
(i. http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9188769 and
(ii. http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=9189278
(Note: A little bit of 'wisdom'  which is often possible to bring to bear on issues via use of the OPMS  can help prevent one from making a fool of oneself. Though it is not 'genius', this too could be very valuable).
GSC ("Still Shoveling! NOT PUSHING!")
GSC posted Aug 8, 2013 12:38 AM: > Further my last dt. Aug 4, 2013 2:14 PM > (http://mathforum.org/kb/message.jspa?messageID=918715 > 5), I found the link to a fascinating and quite > insightful article that had appeared in the New > Yorker (suitable for the layperson) regarding > Grigoriy Perelman's solution of the Poincare > Conjecture: > > "Manifold Destiny", by Sylvia Nasar > http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/08/28/060828fa_f > act2?currentPage=all > > The ideas and attitudes of a true discoverer are > quite 'different'. > > GSC

