The Military-industrial Scientific Research System of the Academic Master Chapter 839

Chapter 839: Theoretical level LV4, obtain passive skills!

Chang Haonan, who is far away in China, naturally does not know that the decision he made unintentionally will cause a lot of troubles to many big figures in the mathematics community.

In the last life, although Perelman also disclosed his research on arXiv, he conducted it three times in two years.

During this period, he also gave a series of lectures on his proof process and ideas.

The result...

Not many people understand it.

So it took nearly three years to finally confirm that his proof was valid.

In total, it actually left a psychological buffer period of five years for the entire mathematics community.

However, this time, Chang Haonan and Perelman used another simpler, but also more subtle, idea.

So much so that not to mention five years, there was not even a five-day buffer left.

From the time they sent the paper to the time the review team understood it, it only took a little more than three days.

Who can bear this?

As Valentin Benahou, who participated in the review, later said:

“This is like a nightmare. What I have always been afraid of is the moment when others will prove the Poincaré conjecture in a way that I don't understand at all.”

The reality is even more than that—

After reading the paper, you will find that the so-called "method I don't understand at all" is actually so simple.

And such a simple method, "I" never thought of it in the past.

This is actually a big blow to a mathematician, especially a mathematician who has studied the Poincaré conjecture but failed.

Such as "Am I really lacking in intelligence?"

In short, it was not until a week later that Chang Haonan, who had finally rested, saw on the news—

A review team composed of Michael Friedman, Simon Donaldson, Edward Witten, and a long list of well-known names, finally confirmed that the Russian scholar Gregory Perelman and the Chinese scholar Chang Haonan gave the The Poincaré conjecture proves the process correct.

The reporter was not polite and asked Witten directly, "Didn't you say last week that you might have to wait a few months to a few years?" After hearing this, I bought a ticket and flew back to New York from Paris. What's going on? The results came out in just seven days? So I had to buy a ticket and fly back.

It's quite interesting to see a serious-looking math guy being criticized so hard that he doesn't know how to answer for a while...

Of course, this is more of a joke, and it's not aimed at Witten.

After all, it has only been a few years since Wiles solved Fermat's last theorem, and many people still remember the dramatic situation that happened at that time.

Wiles announced in June 1993 that he had proved the TaniyamShimura conjecture, but it was soon discovered that his construction of the Euler system had serious flaws, so the Kolyvagin-Fletcher method could not be applied in the scenario at that time.

In December of that year, Wiles publicly acknowledged that there were problems with the certification, but promised to resolve them as soon as possible.

However, mathematical things cannot be solved just by solving them.

In August 1994, Wiles even publicly admitted that his proof had failed.

However, it was at this time that the story of survival from desperation happened.

A month later, Wiles had an idea while conducting a review of the failure, and finally filled in the loopholes in the proof process.

Finally, it was not until 1995 that Wiles' proof was officially recognized and published.

The whole process went through many twists and turns and took nearly two years in total.

So, more serious media reporters basically know that Witten's previous estimate is actually normal.

What is abnormal is this time.

Consequently, attention quickly shifted to Andrew Wiles.

Although he was not directly involved in the review process of the paper, he was the first person to stand up at the Millennium Mathematics Conference and disclose the relevant events to the public.

"Professor Wiles, we still remember that the process of proving Fermat's last theorem was quite... tortuous. So, what do you think of this time that the mathematical community announced that the proof of Poincaré's conjecture was established in just seven days?"

Facing this question, Andrew Wiles shook his head helplessly, showing a "numb" expression.

He swore that at first he just wanted to have fun watching Arthur Jeff and the Clay Mathematics Institute.

The result...

Lezi did see it.

But he is not an audience, but a performer...

However, the question still needs to be answered.

Wiles sighed softly and moved closer to the microphone:

"I think this is the charm of mathematics. You never know whether you will have an idea in the next second, and you never know whether it will take 10 minutes or 10 years to understand a problem..."

"As far as the results are concerned, there is actually no difference between the two, so we might as well pay more attention to the process. One week is certainly enjoyable, but from another perspective, a longer process may also help to obtain more Complete understanding…”

Wiles spent almost his whole life's literary accomplishments and finally gave an answer that did not violate the principles of mathematics but could also protect the past.

As a result, as soon as he finished speaking, he heard Koncevich complaining next to him:

“Don't listen to Andy's words. When he officially admitted that he had failed to prove it, he looked like he was facing the end of the world every day. He even thought about how to write an apology letter..."

There was a burst of good-natured laughter at the scene—

If Wiles does ultimately prove to be a failure, then this is definitely a malicious attempt to expose one's shortcomings.

But he succeeded in the end, so these became anecdotes that could be used to joke with each other.

It's just a little embarrassing at best…

After a short interlude, the topic quickly returned to the Poincaré conjecture.

“This time it only took you a week to confirm that the proof process of the Poincaré conjecture was correct. Does this mean that the difficulty of solving this conjecture is lower than that of some other well-known mathematical problems?”

This is a question that many melon-eating people like to hear.

As a result, Valentin Benahou almost jumped up on the spot.

The old gentleman has spent most of his life trying to solve the Poincaré conjecture. If this thing is easy to solve, wouldn't he...

“Of course not! Absolutely not!”

Benahu frowned: "Actually, it is difficult to directly compare the difficulty of mathematical problems in different fields, but as far as the Poincaré conjecture is concerned, I can say this..."

At this point, he stopped and took a deep breath to calm down a little:

“Poincaré's conjecture, at least so far, is still the only key to our possible understanding of high-dimensional space…”

As time goes by, reporters' questions become more and more acute:

“It is said that the author of this paper did not submit the article to any mathematics journal, but chose to publish it directly to the world on a website?”

“That's right.”

“So, does this mean that existing academic rules may be challenged?”

This issue is indeed a bit sensitive, so that the originally relaxed atmosphere at the scene suddenly became tense.

After about a few seconds, Friedman, who was the first to propose incorporating the arXiv website into the standardized citation system, nodded:

“In fact, according to past academic practices, articles on preprint websites cannot be counted as papers because they can be published without review.”

"but…"

He changed the subject again:

"Since it has now accepted and passed the inspection of the mathematics community, there is no problem in calling it a paper... As for the challenges you mentioned, we prefer to regard this incident as an opportunity and a way to promote academic openness. and equalizing opportunities.”

"Therefore, we are also considering how to integrate this paper into the academic system..."

The reporter just now is obviously not ready to give up easily:

“Does this mean that articles published by others on the arXiv website in the future can also be regarded as academic papers?”

Facing this question, several people interviewed on the stage laughed.

After looking at each other for a few times, it was Edward Witten who spoke:

"Yes."

“If they can also prove the Poincaré conjecture.”

The scene erupted into laughter again...

In fact, from the perspective of academic journals, booksellers, and even many researchers, Chang Haonan and Perelman's approach has indeed greatly harmed their interests.

Because what the reporter just said was right.

This is to challenge the existing academic rules and break the academic monopoly formed by publishing houses and some research institutions.

Although the term "academic monopoly" has been completely discredited due to the non-stop shouting of civil sciences.

But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Especially after the end of the Cold War, it has been unprecedentedly strengthened.

In fact, this itself is a type of invisible hegemony.

but…

There is really nothing we can do this time.

The challenger is too strong…

Most papers need to be recognized by journal editors and peers to prove their academic value.

As for this paper, peers and journal editors need to find ways to recognize it to prove its academic value.

This is like—

Why is it necessary to give Einstein a Nobel Prize even if he found the photoelectric effect in a roundabout way?

Because if a prize involving physics is not even won by Einstein, there is a high probability that it will be regarded as a pheasant prize...

"Professor Benahou just said that the Poincaré conjecture is the only possible key to our understanding of high-dimensional space. Now that this conjecture has been proven, does it mean that we will soon be able to make a leap in applications, or at least in basic physics? Is it possible to create a new technological revolution?

The question this time was from a female reporter from Wired magazine.

ˆ As a media that mainly targets new industries and new technologies, they are obviously more concerned about whether this result can have any real impact.

It's best if you can see business opportunities in it.

“Unfortunately, you may be disappointed.”

Richard Hamilton shook his head:

“This paper does involve a series of new topology tools, but it is difficult for us to use them to solve theoretical problems in other fields in a short time. As for putting them into practical applications...”

He hesitated for a moment:

“I think you should ask the two authors to verify this question.”

The reporter thought to himself that if I could contact those two people, why would I still be blocking them here...

Meanwhile, 12,000 kilometers away.

Chang Haonan, who was watching the press conference live on TV in Beijing, suddenly received a series of system prompts.

【Acquire theoretical level experience: 100000】

【Theoretical level: LV4: 20000/1000000】

　　【Theoretical science is the most powerful weapon for understanding the world. Therefore, after your theoretical level reaches LV4, when you study an unknown phenomenon within your ability, there will be a certain probability that you can see through its essence】

Chang Haonan was half lying on the sofa in a rather awkward posture, but now he sat up suddenly.

It is expected that the theoretical level will be improved after solving the Poincaré conjecture.

But the latter one...maybe it can be called a passive skill.

It was indeed an unexpected surprise.

In particular, Chang Haonan is not a pure mathematician like Perelman.

He is going to do a project.

Behind the project, there are many scientific principles that cannot be fully explained.

Therefore, this ability, even if it only has a "certain probability", will definitely bring huge benefits to research efficiency.

(End of this chapter)

Chapter end

Report