Slashdot Mirror


Going Beyond Fermat's Last Theorem

amjith writes "An Indian mathematician, Chandrashekhar Khare, is poised to make a significant breakthrough in the field of number theory with his solution of part of a major outstanding problem in algebraic number theory. He is currently an associate professor in Mathematics Department of University of Utah. "

357 comments

  1. Papers by Khare by yodha · · Score: 4, Informative
  2. And being Indian ... by ggvaidya · · Score: 2, Insightful

    is in any way relevant why?

    1. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Political correctness is a tool of the man, brother.

    2. Re:And being Indian ... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, they did practically invent Algebra, so I guess it's of interest from a historical perspective.

    3. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      And being an associate professor and at the University of Utah. Why oh why do they flood us with these details? :(

    4. Re:And being Indian ... by Lisandro · · Score: 1

      There's a lot of that going arround here lately, it seems...

    5. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, in a story telling us about some guy who's done something, how could telling us anythingabout the guy be relevant? It's bizarre.

    6. Re:And being Indian ... by DjReagan · · Score: 1

      Its relevant in that it helps show that not everything in the world is done by Americans or done in the USA - something a lot of slashdotters seem to forget.

      --
      "When I grow up, I want to be a weirdo"
    7. Re:And being Indian ... by viscount · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's extra information about the guy that made the breakthrough. It explains why the article that describes the achievement is The Hindu - an Indian newspaper. Obviously you are trying to make a not-so-subtle 'it's racist' comment. Would you have been quite so quick to jump on your high horse if the mathematician was of a different nationality - say American or British?

    8. Re:And being Indian ... by fatmonkeyboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe it's not, but then neither is the fact that he's an associate professor at the Mathematics Department of the University of Utah.

      It's pretty common to mention where people are from when giving a news story. It's part of the human interest.

      I mean, look at the "Science" page RIGHT NOW:

      "First hypothesized to be possible 30 years ago by Russian physicist Victor Veselago, meta-material..."

      See? Russian physicist.

      Are you trying to imply there's some sort of racial overtone to the article? I don't get it.

    9. Re:And being Indian ... by Adams4President · · Score: 1

      It's news. Had it been an American, the article would have said so. Not to mention, the article is hosted on hindu.com

    10. Re:And being Indian ... by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Informative
      I thought is was muslims who did the most work on it in the western world.

      From the wikipedia article: "The word algebra itself comes from the name of the treatise first written by a Persian mathematician Al-Khwarizmi 700 AD, who wrote a treatise titled: Kitab al-mukhtasar fi Hisab Al-Jabr wa-al-Moghabalah meaning The book of summary concerning calculating by transposition and reduction. The word al-jabr (from which algebra is derived) means "reunion", "connection" or "completion"."

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    11. Re:And being Indian ... by ggvaidya · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Okay, point duly noted :).

      It does just seemed to me as if the point'd been made gratuitously, though. Associate Prof (his current job status in the field: it would've be much more interesting if the breakthrough had come from a full Prof, or a grad student) and University of Utah (if you were interested in following up on it) seems to be more relevant than the country he was born in.

      When was the last time Albert Einstein was refered to as "that German professor", or Isaac Newton as "that English scientist"? It's just not relevant.

      Maybe it's just me.

    12. Re:And being Indian ... by Mantorp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      not according to Wikipedia. They got Babylonians, Greeks, Egyptians, Persians and Chinese in the summary. Maybe their outsourcing contracts required that the credit goes to those other countries.

    13. Re:And being Indian ... by catch23 · · Score: 1

      Srinivasa Ramanujan?

    14. Re:And being Indian ... by mattmentecky · · Score: 1

      If you click on Slashdot's math icon and look at a lot of the article's as well as a lot of other science and math articles from various sources, the nationality is usually given. This in of itself might be odd but it is not being discriminatory in this story, with this Indian fellow.

    15. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If it's on Wikipedia, it must be true!

    16. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Mentioning the institution adds relevant information to the story. This gives the reader a chance to see what other work that particular academic department does, as well as gives people an oppritunity to see this professor's academic history.

      If this guy was a professor at the India Institute of Technology, then it would be fine too. If this guy was an Indian at IIT and the headline says "Indian Professor does XYZ", then I would even understand too, but why, as society in America, have to deliniate the work that Americans do and the work that others do? That is racist and demeaning.

    17. Re:And being Indian ... by jea6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It was relevant in the context of the original article, published for an Indian audience on hindu.com.

      --

      sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
    18. Re:And being Indian ... by tjstork · · Score: 4, Informative

      Muslims borrowed heavily from India when they invaded India. The Islamic role in the sciences tended to be more about preserving the best of what they had conquered. As traders, they acted as a point where that knowledge could be disseminated to Europe.

      --
      This is my sig.
    19. Re:And being Indian ... by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1
      When was the last time Albert Einstein was refered to as "that German professor", or Isaac Newton as "that English scientist"?

      Right after George W Bush was referred to as "That WASP President".

    20. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chandrashekhar Khare

      Well there's one. Mentioning the Indian nationality before the name clears up that question for the reader. It's a common practice--try reading more, you'll see.

    21. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was your job outsourced to a certain country in southern Asia beginning with I ending with ndia?

    22. Re:And being Indian ... by ggvaidya · · Score: 1

      *concedes the point* :)

    23. Re:And being Indian ... by zzz1357 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Because Indians are naturally better at higher math than other ethnic groups. Which is why, incidentally, that the early settlers in America tried to wipe them out.

      --
      You can't add pianos and telephones.
    24. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When was the last time Albert Einstein was refered to as "that German professor", or Isaac Newton as "that English scientist"?

      Doubt that this was the last time, but:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton

      I also note that you knew tha nationality of both those gentlemen, so you must have found it mentioned somewhere.

    25. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be relevant for a newspaper to delinate the nationality of a foreign researcher. Its obvious that the newspaper just wants to "show off". If an American newspaper covered an American scientist, he or she being American would not be mentioned beucase it is not relevant. If he or she was Canadian, then it would be mentioned specifically.

    26. Re:And being Indian ... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      I guess I'm the only one who bothered to RTFA.

      The article was from "The Hindu" http://www.hindu.com, which bills itself as "India's online newspaper".

      Which is probably why they care that the guy is INDIAN.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    27. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This can easily get out of control. I can picture the cover of SCIENCE ten years from now:

      "Silly American proves String Theory!"

    28. Re:And being Indian ... by greenplato · · Score: 5, Funny

      That may be true, but you'll never truly understand Algebra until you read it in its original Klingon.

    29. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      When was the last time Albert Einstein was refered to as "that German professor", or Isaac Newton as "that English scientist"? It's just not relevant.

      That happens in Computing Theory classes as well. Every time Alan Turing gets a mention, so does his preference in sexual partners. OK, it's sad that he committed suicide due to persecution by the law, but keep this for a Social Science/Law course, not a Computer Science course.

      You don't see every other resesarch paper author listing their preferences in partners (Personally, I like the sporty chics who go to the fitness centre in hotpants and sports bra's with stripes - look out for my research paper listing this information).

    30. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      They're trying to prove that there is at least 1 non-white guy in Utah.

    31. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, aparently I'M the only one who read TFA.

      Because the real answer here is that the sentence quoted in the Slashdot post ("An Indian mathemetician is poised..." is THE FIRST SENTENCE of TFA. Word for word.

    32. Re:And being Indian ... by Xoro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, it's just you.

      The phrase you find so objectionable is *the first paragraph* of the the linked article in The Hindu, written by one " T. Jayaraman".

      "MUMBAI: An Indian mathematician, Chandrashekhar Khare, is poised to make a significant breakthrough in the field of number theory: with his solution of part of a major outstanding problem in algebraic number theory."

      http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/25/stories/20050425 06 530100.htm

      One suspects that The Hindu wrote it that way because The Hindu takes a special interest in Indians around the world and their achievements -- does this make them racists?

      Only to you.

      --
      Kill, Tux, kill!
    33. Re:And being Indian ... by Omega1045 · · Score: 3, Informative
      That is a really good point. In Muslim control Spain, the Jewish population enjoyed a "Renaissance" of sorts. At that point, Hebrew was an almost dead language. Under the rule of the Moors, the Jews regained much of their cultural identity and created many works of art and literature.

      http://www.fiestasiesta.co.uk/history/jews.html

      --

      Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

    34. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Classical algebra originates with the Greeks. Modern Algebra is a mostly German creation, with various topics developed by the English and French.

    35. Re:And being Indian ... by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Sure, hes only been teaching at an American University for the past 10 years...

    36. Re:And being Indian ... by pandich · · Score: 1
    37. Re:And being Indian ... by ephemeraleuphoria · · Score: 1

      At least they mention which Indian it is this time

    38. Re:And being Indian ... by drakaan · · Score: 1

      You owe me a new keyboard...bastard.

      --
      "Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
    39. Re:And being Indian ... by TheKidWho · · Score: 2, Informative

      you got the wrong indians there buddy.

    40. Re:And being Indian ... by say · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When was the last time Albert Einstein was refered to as "that German professor", or Isaac Newton as "that English scientist"? It's just not relevant.

      Uh... every textbook I've ever read refer to them that way, until the author of the textbook assumes that you know them and their history already.

      I checked my introduction to philosophy textbook, which almost exclusively refers to philosophers by nationality in the first paragraph they're mentioned.

      I think it's just you, yes.

      --
      Roses are #FF0000, violets are #0000FF, all my base are belong to you
    41. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well...

      It really depends if he is Big Indian or Little Indian, I think...

    42. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's adding a tiny bit of detail to the article. The article is written by "The Hindu". I really, really doubt it is going to be racist against Indian people.

      Will you people calm down - stop screaming 'racist' every time someone's nationality is brought up. It's bloody childish.

    43. Re:And being Indian ... by DrewCapu · · Score: 1

      That's only part of the reason why the comment is Funny.

    44. Re:And being Indian ... by HrHolm · · Score: 0
      The Islamic role in the sciences tended to be more about preserving the best of what they had conquered.
      There is definitely some truth in that, but you should still not underestimate the islamic original contributions to the sciences. The works of someone like Al-Khwarizmi were by all means original and ground-breaking, and he was absolutely not alone in that. And that at a time when science in most of Europe was basically dead.
    45. Re:And being Indian ... by Hew · · Score: 1

      And pointing out the obvious:

      The word "algorithm", which a few of the fellow slashdotters might be familiar with, comes from "Al-Khwarizmi"...

      --
      /cj
    46. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Though, even if trained mokey can do it, it seems that most Americans can't if they need to import people from India to do maths for them...

    47. Re:And being Indian ... by tofucubes · · Score: 1
      We, the politically correct people of /. would like to censor the headline to respect for all races and change it to

      "Some thingy is going to make significant breakthrough in the field of number theory with its/his/her solution"

      --
      Some people believe 1-1=3 and for the sake of being politically correct, we should respect their differences
    48. Re:And being Indian ... by Excen · · Score: 1

      I was going to say that it was proof that something good can come out of a Mormon university, but then I realized that he's a Ute not a Cougar.

      --
      "No beer until you finish your tequila!" -Leela's Dad
    49. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      University of St. Andrews has an excellent math history site full of biographies of many mathematicians:
      http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/ history/

      They have an excellent section on Muslim contributions:
      http://turnbull.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~ history/HistTopi cs/Arabic_mathematics.html
      They argue that Muslims did far more than preservation.

    50. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      you got the wrong indians there buddy.

      Baaa. Collateral dammage.
      We'll get the right ones next time!

    51. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You had to see that one from a parsec away. That's a joke without a cloaking device.

    52. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Algebra was not invented in india. It was invented by a Arab Mathematician AbulMusa Al-Khawarizimi; Khawarism is a City in Iraq. In his book Algabr-o-walMuqabila he introduced Quadratic equations and linear equations. He was the guy who introduced Logarithms and decimals. This information was lost when Mongols took over the city and burned all the libraries including scholars:( But this book some how survived. India has a history in mathematics like problem of tower of hanoi comes from india. There must be number of other things which i am not aware of or may be most people are not aware of. And the thing to be nitced is that there was no contact between india and middle east in ninth century C.E or before. Coz indian thought travling accross the indian ocean will make then impure.

    53. Re:And being Indian ... by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      There are that many groups, but in other histories I've encoutered, they say that modern western algebra originated in Islamic society.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    54. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mulims invaded india after Alkhawarzimi had written his book on algebra. Muslims invaded in 712 AD first time but never took over the gov. The guy went back without any attemtp to make a govt. and then some one came back in 11 th century and then muslim rule(colony,kingdom, anything historians name it ) started. So its impossible to say that this knowledge was borrowed from india.

    55. Re:And being Indian ... by cakoose · · Score: 1

      Don't worry. I am Indian and had the same initial reaction. But, like others said, it was a direct quote from the Hindu, where it seems to fit better.

    56. Re:And being Indian ... by computational+super · · Score: 1
      Every time Alan Turing gets a mention, so does his preference in sexual partners.

      I've never heard this... what was his preference? His picture is on the cover of my textbook from this semester, and I did think he looked a bit effeminate, so I have a guess...

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    57. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Associate Prof (his current job status in the field: it would've be much more interesting if the breakthrough had come from a full Prof, or a grad student)"

      I disagree wholeheartedly about the "full prof" part of that statement; I find it quite interesting that the professor is poised to make a breakthrough in mathematics and the Uni hasn't given him tenure yet :)

    58. Re:And being Indian ... by HD+Webdev · · Score: 1

      Because Indians are naturally better at higher math than other ethnic groups. Which is why, incidentally, that the early settlers in America tried to wipe them out.

      Ahh, I was wondering why they do so well with their casinos. Now I know.

      --
      This is not a dream, not a dream...we are transmitting from the year 1-9-9-9.
    59. Re:And being Indian ... by jaoswald · · Score: 1

      Well, I would imagine most universities won't give you tenure *unless* you've shown promising results.

    60. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's another example of "the man" trying to keep us down! It's racism, that's what it is, racism!

    61. Re:And being Indian ... by greatmazinger · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's a reason it's called the Hindu-Arabic number system.....
      http://scitsc.wlv.ac.uk/university/scit/modules/mm 2217/han.htm

    62. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah! Like where are the feathers and the war paint?!

    63. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BAK TAH!

    64. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We killed them because Joseph Smith said they were evil (modern DNA has proved JS totally right on everything).

    65. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's certainly relative to the publication, which is news about Indians. It may also be relative in the sense that other papers aren't all over the story.

    66. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but I would find it VERY interesting if the first promising results this guy had turned out to be a major breakthrough in the field. Most people work up to that sort of thing, if they ever get there at all.

    67. Re:And being Indian ... by etheriel · · Score: 1
      It's part of the human interest.

      where "human interest" = primitive tribal/nationalistic urges.

    68. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, adding that he's an AP at a major university is redundant after telling us he's Indian. I mean, it's a given for all Indian's isn't it?

    69. Re:And being Indian ... by Hrdina · · Score: 1
      The word "algorithm", which a few of the fellow slashdotters might be familiar with, comes from "Al-Khwarizmi"...

      I thought it came from Al Gore.

    70. Re:And being Indian ... by skintigh2 · · Score: 1

      I don't know about "preserving" science. They were the only ones who developed any during out "dark ages" and they invented cryptanalysis and thus modern cryptography.

    71. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're certainly better at multiplying. ;)

    72. Re:And being Indian ... by booch · · Score: 1
      One suspects that The Hindu wrote it that way because The Hindu takes a special interest in Indians around the world and their achievements -- does this make them racists?

      No, that makes them nationalists. Though not in any negative way necessarily. (Nationalism is only bad when it's overly exclusive of other nationalities.)

      --
      Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
    73. Re:And being Indian ... by GROOFY · · Score: 0

      Shh... if they hear you, they might make a Klingon math book, far worse than Hamlet in Klingon was.

    74. Re:And being Indian ... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      > but why, as society in America, have to
      > deliniate the work that Americans do and the
      > work that others do? That is racist and demeaning.

      Why is it racist and demeaning? I, a white guy in America, 3rd generation of my shortest ancestry branch, am not sitting here thinking, "Gosh, that's good...for an Indian guy!" or "How quaint! Indian culture produced someone who did something useful! Good job! [mentally pats the Indian guy on the head.]"

      Why isn't it a source of pride? The "white man's guilt" in America about not mentioning anything about race or religion or what-not is getting rather silly. It's been 15 years since Murphy Brown had an episode where everybody was standing around saying, "Oh, is our new manager black? I hadn't noticed."

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    75. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      An artist is a scholar of themself.

      These are Substandard reflexive pronouns, made on analogy with myself, yourself, herself, itself, ourselves, and themselves. Theirselves and themself for themselves are limited to Vulgar English speech or imitations of it; both are shibboleths. Themself can also occur as an unfortunate result of trying to avoid using a gender-explicit reflexive pronoun by using a blend of the plural them with the singular self. The choices are themselves or himself or herself or both the last two: Everyone must take responsibility for themselves [or himself or herself].

      Themself

    76. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Muslim conquests to India did not begin until the tenth century

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India

    77. Re:And being Indian ... by Theosaur · · Score: 1

      I'm glad they told me Chandrashekhar Khare was an Indian. I would have never guessed

    78. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's in the first sentence of the article (http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/25/stories/200504250 6530100.htm) and was simply copied. The newspaper, in turn, probably mentions it because it is an Indian newspaper.

    79. Re:And being Indian ... by Mean+Ass+Troll · · Score: 1

      while nobody can say that any background info is essential (ie once a work leaves the hands of its author it takes on a life of its own) there is relevance here. why are details like this important? because they can help understand trends in research. Instead of reading that a mysterious dude may have solved an even more mysterious problem, but whether he solved it or not is still even a mystery is not very informative. back ground information like this helps the reader indentify which instituions, nations are at the cutting edge of a given field. if enough reports are mentioning a specific country or institution of major breakthoughs, then that entity will(deservedly) gain a good reputation for solid work and advances. sometimes the who did what, and how can be more important than the what was done and why. Mebbe you should google the princes of serendip for some interesting background. HTH.

    80. Re:And being Indian ... by deepestblue · · Score: 1

      If the mathematician was American or British, it wouldn't have been mentioned in the /. blurb. Since you were so quick to accuse the GP of being a cry-baby, let me point out that the GP was (I think) merely saying that the submitter, an Indian, should broaden his/her mind a little. Yes, just in case it's relevant to you, I'm an Indian too.

    81. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd have suggested 'patriots' though your suggestion is just as valid. And that form of nationalism you mentioned is 'jingoism'.

    82. Re:And being Indian ... by Synbiosis · · Score: 1

      That's irrelevant.

      They may have taken the number system, but modern Algebra was more or less invented by Al-Khwarizmi.

      I find it amusing that in every high school text that I've read about the Muslim empires, they attribute their great scientific wealth to their preservation of ancient traditions. Which is quite true, but that does not make them incapable of making scientific discoveries.

    83. Re:And being Indian ... by Phleg · · Score: 1

      And Russians are...black?

      --
      No comment.
    84. Re:And being Indian ... by swimmar132 · · Score: 1

      And on that note, did you know that Chinese people love to clean clothes!

    85. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Islam or Islamic invaders had absolutely NOTHING to do with science or mathematics. Most of the bright scientists that lived during those times were brave souls who had nothing to with religion and many subtly hinted their revulsion for Islam in their treatises.

      As for India's contribution to math and science, it is a lot more significant than most people realize. Check out what this website of mathematicians from around the world has to say about Panini an Indian genius who lived around 500BC:

      "Panini should be thought of as the forerunner of the modern formal language theory used to specify computer languages. The Backus Normal Form was discovered independently by John Backus in 1959, but Panini's notation is equivalent in its power to that of Backus and has many similar properties. It is remarkable to think that concepts which are fundamental to today's theoretical computer science should have their origin with an Indian genius around 2500 years ago"

      http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Math em aticians/Panini.html

    86. Re:And being Indian ... by Imran · · Score: 1

      Others have already responded to you with very informative posts (which deserve a 5 rating far more than yours, I'm afraid) detailing how you are quite incorrect with specific regard to algebra.

      On a more general note - all civilisations who made great scientific strides did so by first learning from predecessor civilisations. Where would the ancient Greeks have been without the Egyptians (see Herodotus for a frank assessment of the 'debt' due).

      Learning from others does NOT mean that one does not then extend and expand on what one has learned.

      With specific regards to Islamic civilisation(s) between the 8th and 14th centuries CE, I'm afraid that you are quite wrong to state that they were simply dumb librarians, without the ability to expand upon what they had inherited.

      In many sciences, they DID make great, original strides. In fact, it was this striving which led them to seek out ancient and foreign treatises on the matters at hand.

      Both activities were parallel, and complemented each other.

    87. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because trained monkeys are superior to most Americans, academically. Additionally, economic conditions in India are so poor, in some places, that a fellow can support an entire family on trained-monkey wages.

    88. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they should be proud? umm....

    89. Re:And being Indian ... by confusion+here · · Score: 1

      He was gay. See this Wikipedia article for more information.

    90. Re:And being Indian ... by naveenkumar.s · · Score: 1

      I think you need to correct your history.
      Muslim invasion of India started only in the 11th century A.D. And Algebra existed even before that.
      Rather, ancient Indian mathematicians contributed substantially towards number theory (having invented Zero and all). That knowledge spread to Europe through Persia and the Moorish kingdom.
      It's a sad fact that the scientific output of India dwindled starting from the 11th century. May not be a coincidence.

    91. Re:And being Indian ... by tjstork · · Score: 1

      I never stated that the Islamic civilizations were dumb librarians. But one does have to ask, how does one become exposed to algebra and then not invent calculus? They never allowed their science to progress to the point where a technological revolution could upset the centers of religious power, a problem that continues to haunt them to this day.

      --
      This is my sig.
    92. Re:And being Indian ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out this post from above.

    93. Re:And being Indian ... by Imran · · Score: 1

      Again, I will have to strongly disagree with you.

      1) Why did their 'progress' stop?

      You are completly ignoring the effects of the Mongol Holocaust. What Europe suffered was just a side show compared to the deluge that hit Islam. Afghanistan was turned into a man-made desert within one generation. Cities and states were ransacked. Libraries were burnt, and entire educated classes were put to the sword.

      In effect, the Muslim Ummah (a better term to use for this discussion than 'Islam') never really recovered. Learning and scientific endeavour were put back by CENTURIES.

      Example: Arab secretaries post 1500CE were unable to decrypt documents which their predecessors 3 centuries previous could have done in their sleep (see Kahn's "The Code Book").

      Example: Damascus and Baghdad today ARE SMALLER than they were pre-Mongol invasion.

      The Mongol Holocaust, coming right at the end of the Crusades, really put most of the Arab world into a deep freeze, from which it is just now starting to emerge (long process).

      2) scientific progress was held back to prevent upsetting 'religous power centers'.

      I get really tired of hearing these kind of ignorant statements from non-Muslims. If 'religous powers-that-be' were so against scientific progress, than can you explain HOW the Arabs progressed from a people whose only cultural achievements were linguistic (poetry, etc), to becoming the worlds dominant scientific civilisation, all AFTER becoming Muslim?

      There is a strong 'pro-learning' and 'pro-scientific endeavour' in Islamic thought. Hadiths (sayings) from the Prophet (pbuh) can be brought up as testimony.

      But I suspect that it is futile to re-argue these again, ad-infinitum. The accepted wisdom today is that Islam is a backward religon, whose yoke needs to be overturned before any real progress can be made. You can file this 'widom' under other such truths as:
      'Iraq has weapons of mass destruction', and
      'Most Muslim males are terrorists'.

      If people can construct such a world view while remaining blissfully IGNORANT of the religon/people/culture they are condemning, than no amount of debate will change their minds, so why bother.

      PS: I'm not saying that this completely applies to you. I don't know you. But the points you made, when expanded upon, tend to fall into the above camp.

  3. Another one? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 0, Troll

    At least this Indian mathematician is still alive. :)

    1. Re:Another one? by rdwald · · Score: 2, Insightful

      At least this Indian mathematician is still alive. :)

      Even better, at least this Indian mathematician has a name.

    2. Re:Another one? by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      It's been at least a month since I last heard the "Some Indian math guy" meme...apparently people forgot it was supposed to be a joke about the lack of a name in the original article.

      A mistake that this article, fortunately, didn't repeat.

  4. Somebody give that man tenure, quick! by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have a feeling a lot of excellent math departments will be looking to hire this guy from Utah.

    1. Re:Somebody give that man tenure, quick! by DrewCapu · · Score: 5, Funny

      Too late, the San Francisco 49ers already drafted him.

      Oh wait.

    2. Re:Somebody give that man tenure, quick! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. University of Florida.

      First we took their President, then we took their football coach, next... we take their mathematicians!

  5. But... by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Funny
    > An Indian mathematician, Chandrashekhar Khare, is poised to make a significant breakthrough in the field of number theory with his solution of part of a major outstanding problem in algebraic number theory.

    503 - Service Unavailable. There is insufficient bandwidth in the server room to supply you with a copy of this paper.

    1. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I have discovered a truely remarkable proof for this theorem which the bandwidth of the server is unable to contain.

    2. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD PARENT UP!!!

    3. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 hilarious

    4. Re:But... by superdoo · · Score: 1

      How much bandwidth can you fit in a server room anyways?

    5. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quick! Set up a torrent on Internet2. That will show the MPAA who's boss!

    6. Re:But... by Actuator+Man · · Score: 1
      But they did supply you with a nice prime number:
      Sum[Prime[n]^3, {n, 4}] = 2^3 + 3^3 + 5^3 + 7^3 = 503
    7. Re:But... by brettper · · Score: 1

      Slighly less than enough apparently

  6. Isnt everybody? by ShaniaTwain · · Score: 5, Funny

    I know I'm poised to make a huge breakthrough, unfortunately I can never seem to make it over that last hurdle, which is, you know.. to make the actual breakthrough.

    1. Re:Isnt everybody? by Timesprout · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm the same. The problem with number theory for me is that they just dont add up.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    2. Re:Isnt everybody? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just about every scientist and mathematician out there is "poised" on discovering something... it's just that most have the professionalism to announce it AFTER they've succeeded. Cold Fusion anyone???

    3. Re:Isnt everybody? by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's kind of like patent _pending_. Let me know when you actually _have_ the patent.

    4. Re:Isnt everybody? by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1
      The problem with number theory for me is that they just dont add up.

      Try using The New Math.

    5. Re:Isnt everybody? by wfijvvz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is that unproffesionalism on his part? Or on the part of the idiotic journalists picking up a story before it was ready? Science works because scientists communicate. "Hey I plan on attacking this problem using this two part method. I'll let you know how it goes!" "Here is what I've done so far. That's part one. It looks like it's going well, but it might not work. I'll let you know how it goes!"

    6. Re:Isnt everybody? by SilicaiMan · · Score: 1
      I have a more difficult hurdle:

      The margins of this page are too narrow to fit my breakthrough ..

    7. Re:Isnt everybody? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoah, Shania Twain pots on Slashdot? Hey I just wanted to say you're still hot, even after having the baby.

    8. Re:Isnt everybody? by Dwonis · · Score: 1

      Without RTFA, I'd guess that it means that he has made some sort of advance, *assuming he's correct* (i.e. the results haven't been verified yet).

    9. Re:Isnt everybody? by Dwonis · · Score: 1
      And after RTFA, I find out that I was wrong:
      In earlier work done with the French mathematician, J.P. Wintenberger, in December 2004, Dr. Khare outlined a two-part general strategy to prove the Serre conjecture fully. The present result is a first key step.
    10. Re:Isnt everybody? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whoa, Shania Twain pots! Even cooler

    11. Re:Isnt everybody? by NarrMaster · · Score: 1

      I only use genuine Bush-brand Fuzzy Math(tm).

      --
      That's right. All your base.
    12. Re:Isnt everybody? by squidfood · · Score: 1
      I know I'm poised to make a huge breakthrough, unfortunately I can never seem to make it over that last hurdle, which is, you know.. to make the actual breakthrough.

      Utah... poised.... cold fusion.... there's a joke there somewhere...

  7. Fast Tenure for him by afstanton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If htis pans out as well as it looks like it will, this guy will be a full professor in no time flat.

    --
    Reject Fear - Embrace Hope
  8. What is it about? by ghoti · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Could somebody explain what this is about, and what this would mean? There isn't any concrete information on that in TFA ...

    Besides, this is kinda vaporware. Why is this even news? Why not talk about it once it's done?

    --
    EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
    1. Re:What is it about? by Cat_Byte · · Score: 1
      Besides, this is kinda vaporware. Why is this even news? Why not talk about it once it's done?

      I was thinking the same thing. I'm poised to finish lots of projects myself (mostly linux programs).

      --
      Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one the bus load of girls just went down.
    2. Re:What is it about? by Timesprout · · Score: 5, Funny

      This proof will be the final step in achieving a 10x performance increase in the DNF rendering engine. We can expect to see DNF released shortly after this guy completes the solution.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    3. Re:What is it about? by mbw234 · · Score: 1

      >> Why not talk about it once it's done?

      If he were to present the paper that he feels proves a major conjecture, then it would have to withstand scrutiny from mathematicians for at least one year before it is considered correct. So it makes sense to talk about it now. Same thing happened with Wile's proof, Perelman's, and most major proofs in the past.

    4. Re:What is it about? by Draknor · · Score: 1

      Wow... and you got modded informative for that? Kudos :-)

      Now I have to wonder - was the moderator trying to be nice & bump up your karma my moderating you "informative", or was the moderator totally clueless and thought "hey, this person sounds intelligent - I better mod it informative"

    5. Re:What is it about? by supmylO · · Score: 1

      Ahh, cue the "you must be new around here" jokes..

    6. Re:What is it about? by SimpsonsQuoter · · Score: 1

      A little from column A, a little from column B.

    7. Re:What is it about? by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      It's research into number theory at the University of Utah.

      I think it's safe to assume applications in polygamy.

    8. Re:What is it about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really need to ask that?

  9. Heh. by ggvaidya · · Score: 0

    Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff thats about to happen.

  10. Poised? by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Funny

    So he's involved with outlining a two-part solution... and he's completed one part of it. That's sort of an actual accomplishment, isn't it?

    I mean, I'm poised to win the lottery. He's actually doing things.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Poised? by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 4, Funny
      So he's involved with outlining a two-part solution... and he's completed one part of it.

      So, he's involved with outlining the first part of a potential two-part solution to something that is only a theory?

  11. Actual info by vossman77 · · Score: 4, Informative

    He has proved what is known to specialists in the field as the `level-1 case of the Serre conjecture.' In earlier work done with the French mathematician, J.P. Wintenberger, in December 2004, Dr. Khare outlined a two-part general strategy to prove the Serre conjecture fully. The present result is a first key step.

    Wikipedia page for Serre conjecture

    1. Re:Actual info by StillNeedMoreCoffee · · Score: 1



      Riiiiiight.... what's a Qbit?

  12. you might want to change the URL by neye_eve · · Score: 3, Informative

    the underline appears all the way through " to make a significant breakthrough in the field of number theory with his solution "

    even though the word "solution" leads to a different link than all of the preceding words.

  13. Explanation needed by rg3 · · Score: 1

    I thought Fermat's Last Theorem was proved not so long ago by someone else, using some sort of complex geometry concepts. Can any expert confirm this or explain why this is relevant?

    1. Re:Explanation needed by vossman77 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It was proved in 1995 by English mathematician Andrew Wiles.

      Wikipedia page of the theorem

      I don't follow the field close enough to know its relation to Serre's multiplicity conjectures.

    2. Re:Explanation needed by rg3 · · Score: 1

      Sorry to reply to myself, but a search for Fermat's Last Theorem in Google returns this URL as the first result, and it mentions the proof I was talking about right at the end:

      http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTo pics/Fermat's_last_theorem.html

    3. Re:Explanation needed by Kainaw · · Score: 1

      I thought Fermat's Last Theorem was proved not so long ago by someone else, using some sort of complex geometry concepts. Can any expert confirm this or explain why this is relevant?

      Like Hollywood - the sequel doesn't have to have anything to do with the original. You just need the name that people know, like Fermat's Last Theorem. I can see it now:

      Fermat II: The Serre Conjecture, starring Keanu Reeves as Chandra Khare (he looks Indian enough), a simple mathmetician from Utah. Just when thought it was safe to go into the theoretical waters again... the Serre Conjecture. As the world's nations cry in fear, one man comes up with a two-part solution to... well, this is Hollywood. He blows stuff up and gets the woman in the end.

      --
      The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
    4. Re:Explanation needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Andrew Wiles, in the kitchen, with the candlestick.

      (Actually it was more like elliptic and modular equations, IIRC.)

    5. Re:Explanation needed by scovetta · · Score: 1

      IANAE, but I think this work is to prove the Serre conjecture, which itself implies Fermat's Last Theorem.

      --
      Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
    6. Re:Explanation needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG! You said he was english! Now everyone is going to complain and call you racist!!

    7. Re:Explanation needed by saforrest · · Score: 1

      Fermat II: The Serre Conjecture, starring Keanu Reeves as Chandra Khare (he looks Indian enough), a simple mathmetician from Utah.

      Did you see the life of Buddha starring Keanu Reeves as good ol' Siddhartha himself?

      It was somewhat less than convincing.

    8. Re:Explanation needed by bmalek · · Score: 1

      The problem currently stands that proof to Fermat's Last Theorem can only be given by some very complicated math that maybe 1% of the population could understand. It is my understanding that this proof would provide a more simple (read elegant) proof for the Theorem.

      For those of you wondering, the reason why the Theorem was so important was due to Fermat himself. In the margin of a book he wrote that he had a proof for his theorem but it was too long to put in the margin. That was the only mention of a proof given by Fermat and for a couple hundred years mathemeticians have been trying to complete the proof. I am fairly certain that Wiles's proof is not the same as Fermat's as some of the concepts used to prove it were not around in Fermat's time. I do not, however, know if this proof could have been the one given by Fermat.

      And if that hasn't show off my geekdom enough, the PBS show Nova has a great video on the subject of Fermat's Last Theorem (which I sadly own).

    9. Re:Explanation needed by saforrest · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Can any expert confirm this or explain why this is relevant?

      Yes, Fermat's Last Theorem was proven by Andrew Wiles in the early nineties.

      This result would (apparently) supply another proof. Like the first, it would rely on quite complex and modern mathematics, but a slightly different sort than before.

      The thing is that Fermat's Last Theorem is not especially important to mathematics; it's mostly a historical curiosity. However, it is a simple enough equation that anyone with a smattering of mathematics can understand: all you need to understand is exponentiation and addition operations, what an equation is, and what integers are. Plus, the story about Fermat's boast makes good press. These things make the equation famous.

      So, the fact that this may prove Fermat's Last Theorem is icing on the cake, but for mathematicians the importance of the result is in its major implications for a vast field of research (algebraic geometry).

      If it is actually proven, that is. I have seen enough popular accounts of some mathematician "on the verge of proving X" to not put much trust in such things. Wiles was wise to work in secret.

    10. Re:Explanation needed by EvanED · · Score: 1

      I am fairly certain that Wiles's proof is not the same as Fermat's as some of the concepts used to prove it were not around in Fermat's time.

      Given that it took Wiles years to prove it, and several mathematical techniques that were unknown until the 1960s (eliptic curves), I think you can be more than fairly certain.

      I do not, however, know if this proof could have been the one given by Fermat.

      We'll have to wait for the proof, but I seriously doubt it.

      In my mind the most likely case was that Fermat thought he had a proof but was mistaken; it's happened to countless mathematicians since.

    11. Re:Explanation needed by scovetta · · Score: 1

      The problem currently stands that proof to Fermat's Last Theorem can only be given by some very complicated math that maybe 1% of the population could understand.

      I think you could probably make that 1% of mathematicians. I tried reading the 186-page book as an undergrad. Got through page 4 and then realized I wasn't cut out to be a theoretical mathematician.

      --
      Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
    12. Re:Explanation needed by StillNeedMoreCoffee · · Score: 1

      Correction (not unlike what the article you refered to explained). The original 1995 proof was not correct as stated and had to be re-worked and resurrected in 1994 in a correct version. That is not to say that Wiles did not prove it but if his proof in 1955 was found to be flawed, then it was not proven in 1955. Not until all the steps are correct and bullet proof is it considered proven.

    13. Re:Explanation needed by tbjw · · Score: 1

      It's not related closely to Serre's multiplicity conjectures. It is related to Serre's reciprocity conjecture, and I can't find an introductory page on that topic anywhere.

    14. Re:Explanation needed by 0xC0FFEE · · Score: 1

      It is safe to say that you had more than enough coffee already

    15. Re:Explanation needed by jkauzlar · · Score: 1
      IANAM (mathematician) nor an expert, but it looks like Andrew Wile's 1994 proof was somewhat roundabout in its methods of proving FLT. The solution to Serre's Conjecture, which Kharan is proving, will imply the truth of FLT, so its a much more direct way of proving FLT. More importantly, the proof is a part of the 'Langlands Program,' which is a lengthy program which has the goal of correlating the theory of 'Lie Groups' with symmetry in number theory. Lie Groups, I believe, are structures of matrices and studied in the very active field of representation theory.

      Sorry for all of the technical terms in this description, but I barely know what they mean either. The point is that Dr. Kharan's proof is showing correlations between two large areas of mathematics (Lie Groups and a certain type of number theory), and so results between one group can be used to prove results in another. A proof like this generally leads to big advancements in mathematics. Here's a brief description from mathforge.net.

    16. Re:Explanation needed by NuShrike · · Score: 1

      So this proof of Fermat's last work involves some coffee and a time machine?

      Or, is this another Ford and Arthur mangling?

      I guess have to wait for the other whale to drop.

    17. Re:Explanation needed by otisaardvark · · Score: 1

      Lie Groups aren't necessarily matrices, although matrix groups like GL(n,C) and various subgroups do provide the canonical examples.

      A Lie Group is simultaneously:
      1) a manifold - basically, a infinitely differentiable (smooth) surface that locally looks like Euclidean space at every point) and
      2) an abstract group with the group operations of composition and inversion smooth (infinitely differentiable).

      The basic reason that Lie Groups are so important as a class of manifolds is that properties like left multiplication or conjugation by group elements automatically give you a mechanism to "travel around" the surface easily.

      There is a very strong representation theory of Lie Groups, (and also of Lie Algebras, which are closely related).

      PS Thanks for mathforge.net! Keep up the good work.

    18. Re:Explanation needed by StillNeedMoreCoffee · · Score: 1

      No It appears the original proof was dis-proven by someone finding a flaw in the logic. Then the original proof was resurrected by changing some of the logic so it was correct. That was publised in 1994.

      A proof that has a flaw is not a proof.

      The 1994 proof I think still stands and has not yet been found to have flaws. That is the other shoe that could drop possibly. It did with the first attempt.

    19. Re:Explanation needed by jkauzlar · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the clarification and I'm happy that you like Mathforge! My self-study is about half-way through advanced algebra, but I can just about understand the terms you're using as well as "Sere's Conjecture," and I will be thrilled when I finally can :)

    20. Re:Explanation needed by kobithedog · · Score: 1

      The the fact the he is English is relevant how?

    21. Re:Explanation needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This case of Serre's conjecture gives another proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, independent of the proof of the "Taniyama-Shimura conjecture for elliptic curves", proved by Wiles (but the proof uses similar tools).
      You can look at Ken Ribet's abstract on this in:

      http://www.cms.math.ca/Events/summer05/abs/Plenm.h tml

  14. GO UTES by Piewalker · · Score: 1

    BCS and Math busters, yeah! (Utah Alum, 2003)

    1. Re:GO UTES by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and FUCK BYU!

    2. Re:GO UTES by northcat · · Score: 1

      He's from the same University! Quick, mod him up!

    3. Re:GO UTES by Lovesquid · · Score: 2, Funny

      All your football coach are belong to us.
      Go Gators.

    4. Re:GO UTES by rewt66 · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Not to mention three (projected) number one draft picks this year: Alex Smith in football, Andrew Bogut in basketball, and of course Chandrashekhar Khare in mathematics! (Utah Alum, 1984)

    5. Re:GO UTES by Piewalker · · Score: 1

      I resent that.

    6. Re:GO UTES by Piewalker · · Score: 1

      Projected? Alex Smith WAS drafted #1 pick to the 49ers...that's a reality. Bogut is coming up, and is almost a sure bet to go quick in the NBA draft. And Chandrashekhar has nowhere to get drafted to except...well...the annals of history. All important ventures, right?

    7. Re:GO UTES by rewt66 · · Score: 1

      Well, as someone else pointed out, he's very likely to be made a full professor somewhere, very soon. That's "drafted" in an academic sense, more or less...

    8. Re:GO UTES by Piewalker · · Score: 1

      I concur. High Five. *SLAP

    9. Re:GO UTES by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Don't forget that Sweet 16 appearance!

  15. Serre Conjecture by 00squirrel · · Score: 4, Interesting
    More info about the Serre Conjecture can be found here.

    Pretty exciting stuff! (Relatively speaking, of course :-)

    1. Re:Serre Conjecture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just once I wish someone could explain these math concepts to the laypeople here in clear and simple language. But perhaps it simply isn't possible.

    2. Re:Serre Conjecture by tbjw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Somebody mod the parent '-1 Misleading'. There are two problems commonly known as the "Serre conjecture", and the parent happens to point to the wrong one. This problem has very little to do with number theory.

      It's probably best to refer to the conjecture that is on the verge of being solved as "Serre's reciprocity conjecture".

      The other conjecture was solved in 1976, and ought to be called "The Quillen-Suslin Theorem", except that that also could refer to another related but different result.

  16. And simply mentioning a person's nationality ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is in any way harmful why?

  17. encryption by Voidwalker · · Score: 1

    If I remember correctly this can have quite an effect on the area of cryptography. I seem to recall something about one of Fermat's theorms in regards to RSA encryption. It's been awhile since I've studied it though so I'm not sure.

    1. Re:encryption by tomstdenis · · Score: 3, Informative

      Um ... the only one related to crypto would be the theorem that a^p mod p == a if p is prime and a is co-prime to p.

      That's not only not the famous Fermat Last Theorem but it's also trivially provable with basic number theory.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:encryption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      duh

    3. Re:encryption by E+Galois · · Score: 1

      That's a bold statement considering Fermat's contributions to number theory, analysis, analytic geometry, probability theory, etc...

      BTW, the theorem you cite is known as Fermat's Little Theorem, and is the basis of Public Key Cryptography methods.

      "I have a truly marvelous demonstration of this proposition which this margin is too small to contain."" -- Pierre de Fermat

    4. Re:encryption by psetzer · · Score: 1

      There are two types of theorems. Trivial and unproven. The proof of the Shimura-Taniyama conjecture (now theorem) is trivial since it's been done. Given enough time, I know a few math profs who might dump one of those on a Sophomore level Proof Structures class.

      --
      "Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is living in a state of sin." -- John von Neumann
  18. Racist Double Standard in Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If we say someone is a "Caucasian" or "White" scientist, there would be (and rightly so) all sorts of crying and screaming.

    We are all humans, lets treat each other with some dignity, not as "Oh he's Indian".

    I'm White and I have a Chinese wife, yet I do not go parading her around like some object of amusement with my family and friends saying "HEY she's Chinese, isnt that special?".

    1. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indian, as in nationality, not race. No, it would never say "white" or "Caucasian"; you would see "American", "British", "German", etc. Heck, you're the one assuming he's not Caucasian just because he's of Indian descent.

    2. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indian is an ethnicity, dumbass.

    3. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't Indians (at least those in the north), generally classified as caucasian?

    4. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by blueskies · · Score: 1

      Heck, you're the one assuming he's not Caucasian just because he's of Indian descent.

      Wrong. I'm assuming it also. Is that, ok? Why would i not assume it? Why don't you tell me what i should have assumed from the few facts i read in the headline?

      Hey, look at that! RTFA and the picture shows an Indian guy who does not look Caucasian!

      Anyway, I thought the Indian part was meaningless until i saw the article and noticed that he was still a citizen of India (and not a US citizen that came from Indian descent).

    5. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by coopex · · Score: 1

      To expand on this comment: http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=147252 &cid=12338367

      http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=caucasian Caucasian ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kô-kzhn, -kzhn) adj. Anthropology. Of or being a major human racial classification traditionally distinguished by physical characteristics such as very light to brown skin pigmentation and straight to wavy or curly hair, and including peoples indigenous to Europe, northern Africa, western Asia, and India. No longer in scientific use. See Usage Note at race1.

      Wow! It seems that not only whites are Caucasian, but Egyptians and other North Africans, Arabs, and Indians are too! Gee, isn't it funny how some words actually have specific meanings!

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    6. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also a nationality, dumbass.

    7. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wrong. I'm assuming it also. Is that, ok? Why would i not assume it? Why don't you tell me what i should have assumed from the few facts i read in the headline?

      I never said it was wrong. I assumed it also. I just don't think people who believe pointing out a nationality is racist, as the parent poster has said, should be making any assumptions about anyone, since that's what's at the heart of racism.

      Hey, look at that! RTFA and the picture shows an Indian guy who does not look Caucasian!

      Anyway, I thought the Indian part was meaningless until i saw the article and noticed that he was still a citizen of India (and not a US citizen that came from Indian descent).

      My point exactly. He's from India. He may or may not be ethnically Indian, it doesn't matter. The article mentioned his nationality, and that is normal in any news story.

    8. Re:Racist Double Standard in Society by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      considering race doesn't exist except in the minds of ignorants, this doesn't seem to be an issue.

  19. Hey mods by p3d0 · · Score: 1

    This is a direct quote from TFA.

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  20. I thought... by Stalyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    that Serre's Conjecture was already proven?

    --
    The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
    1. Re:I thought... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 3, Informative

      umm.. no.. 3 of the 4 conjectures have been proven.. positivity of R/p and R/Q is still in question.. and no.. showing that it is non negative is not a proof of positivity.. 0 is not positive.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:I thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it was proven, it wouldn't be Serres *Conjecture* anymore.

  21. Every day... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...hundreds of new mathemtical theorems are discovered by people around the world. Many of these become peer reviewed and published. So why is this particular one on the front page? It's basically unknown outside of mathematical circles and is posted on a web site where any crackpot can post. Shall we start having stories about JSH on sci.math?

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    1. Re:Every day... by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, please. JSH is hillarious.

    2. Re:Every day... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

      After 8 years the joke wears thin!

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    3. Re:Every day... by benj_e · · Score: 1

      Good lord, is he still around? He's the reason I stopped reading sci.math

      --
      The Tao that can be spoken is not the one eternal Tao
    4. Re:Every day... by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      Eight years, damn. That's one persistent troll. I didn't realize it'd been that long, hehe, I only check up on math.sci every once in a while.

    5. Re:Every day... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

      Same here. I went back after many years and couldn't believe he was still dominating the group. In the old days it was Ludwig Plutonium.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    6. Re:Every day... by mblase · · Score: 1

      why is this particular one on the front page? It's basically unknown outside of mathematical circles

      Slashdot is "News for Nerds." What part of that did you fail to understand?

    7. Re:Every day... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

      The 'News' bit.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    8. Re:Every day... by saforrest · · Score: 1

      In the old days it was Ludwig Plutonium.

      Archimedes Plutonium is so famous that he even has a wikipedia article about him.

  22. The Inevitable "What Use" Question by DumbSwede · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just to speculate on a possible "what use" question that might arise, I can't help but notice the line This is one of the central themes of modern research in number theory and is devoted to the study of the relation between the symmetries of number theory and geometry. . If I may be so bold, anything that ties the study of pure math to geometry probably has implications for quantum mechanics. These objects may lie embedded in higher dimensions, and probably settle into stable configurations from near infinite possibilities. But they still have to satisfy some allowable mathematical model. This is just the type of thing that may allow us to better predict what those allowable states could be.

    1. Re:The Inevitable "What Use" Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No you may not be so bold.

    2. Re:The Inevitable "What Use" Question by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 1
      If I may be so bold, anything that ties the study of pure math to geometry probably has implications for quantum mechanics. These objects may lie embedded in higher dimensions, and probably settle into stable configurations from near infinite possibilities. But they still have to satisfy some allowable mathematical model. This is just the type of thing that may allow us to better predict what those allowable states could be.

      Geometers might be a bit upset if you don't call geometry "pure math." Nowadays with computers and all, number theory is more applied than geometry. And how exactly does this all tie in with quantum theory? Quantum theory is the study of discrete infinitessimals (and the big problem is to make it converge to the continuum), but what exactly does this have to do with "embedding in higher dimensions" and "settling into stable configurations"? "near infinite possibilities"? You've got to be kidding me. Mods: this guy is either a karma whore (and by looking at his weblog, this seems to be the case), a troll, or an armchair mathematician/physicist who's just succeeded in punking you by stringing together a bunch of fancy sounding words with NO common thread. Please.

      --
      Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
      Africus aut Europaeus?
    3. Re:The Inevitable "What Use" Question by maxhead · · Score: 1

      ...meaning Plato was right!?

    4. Re:The Inevitable "What Use" Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Begone! Back to the primordial ooze from whence you sprang!

    5. Re:The Inevitable "What Use" Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      from whence is redundant, dumbass.

    6. Re:The Inevitable "What Use" Question by StillNeedMoreCoffee · · Score: 1

      It appears as though he was talking about Quantum Computation which is of course part of Quantum theory and yes Qbits store all the solutions to a computation until you read them when they collapse down to a specific result. Sort of like being in a different dimension of all possibilites and collapsing down into this reality. So what he was talking about seems to pertain.

    7. Re:The Inevitable "What Use" Question by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      Just to make it clear, there's two fairly distinct branches of mathematics, pure and applied.

      Pure is what follows from the process that involves postulating axioms, defining new objects abstractly, and proving things about them. Applied mathematics takes these abstract mathematical concepts and applies them to the real world. Sometimes, technically pure math that's pretty clearly derived explicitly to apply in "real world" contexts (i.e., good approximation methods, solutions to certain diff eqs, etc) is also labelled applied, but that's on the edge.

      Anyway, what I'm getting at is that geometry and pure math are certainly not mutually exclusive categories. I hope to do geometry in grad school, and I sure as hell am not planning on doing applied math unless something changes radically.

  23. Only by dstone · · Score: 1

    Creating anything, material or philosophical, can be equally impermanent and unlikely to last. Build a bridge, it falls apart. Build a theory, it falls apart. Your "only a theory" implication of inferiority doesn't stand up.

    1. Re:Only by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1

      Ah, I wasn't implying that the theory was inferior. I was implying that this story is only relevant when the professor actually completes his task. At this point, he isn't even half-way finished.

    2. Re:Only by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      A rigorous proof of a theorem will never fall apart unless the basic axioms of logic fall apart. A proof is basically saying "assuming these things, this must be true."

      The application (the "theory" part) may fall apart, but once proved, the theorem will essentially last forever. That's one of the draws of mathematics.

  24. Beyond Fermat by amightywind · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is the real problem beyond Fermat

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
  25. Tata Institute of Fundamental Research by GillBates0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    TIFR website here (runs Linux btw):

    Via: 1.1 sj-netcache (NetCache NetApp/5.3.1R4D10)
    Server: Apache/1.3.29 (Debian GNU/Linux) PHP/4.3.4 mod_perl/1.29
    Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
    Client-Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 17:12:59 GMT
    Client-Response-Num: 1
    X-Powered-By: PHP/4.3.4

    About TIFR:
    The Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) was established in 1945 at the initiative of Dr. Homi Jehangir Bhabha. It had a modest beginning at the Kenilworth site on Peddar Road, Bombay in 1945 and later moved to the Royal Yacht Club, Apollo Bunder until the buildings at the Navy Nagar Campus in South Bombay were ready in 1962. The Institute is proud to have produced many of the finest scientists of India who have been involved in seminal research in fields ranging from Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science, Physics and Science Education as well as some aspects of Public Health.

    There are at present about 400 scientists in the Institute working in various disciplines grouped into three major schools: the School of Mathematics, the School of Natural Sciences and the School of Technology and Computer Science. The Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education at Deonar, Bombay; The National Centre for Radio Astrophysics at Pune and The National Centre for Biological Sciences at Bangalore also form a part of TIFR activities.

    The School of Mathematics has research interests in areas like Algebra, Algebraic Geometry, Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, Algebraic Groups, Representation Theory and Quantum Groups, Theory of Numbers, Combinatorics, Differential Geometry and Topology, Real and Complex Analysis, Ergodic Theory, Probability Theory on Groups and Mathematical Physics.

    The School of Mathematics has a Centre in Bangalore dedicated to the study of Applied Mathematics where mathematicians work in the fields of Differential Equations, Harmonic Analysis, Numerical Analysis and Probability Theory.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
  26. Anyone remember Ferma'ts Last Theorem musical? by ShyGuy91284 · · Score: 1

    I remember in HS we once watched a play on DVD on Fermat's Last Theorem. It was called Fermat's Last Tango . It was a rather interesting thing seeing mathematics portrayed in a musical form, and to this day, I still recall parts of the lyrics.....

    --
    In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
  27. If it's Fermat's last theorem.. by HungSoLow · · Score: 3, Funny
    How can you go beyond it? Is it not the last?!

    *ducks*

    1. Re:If it's Fermat's last theorem.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Reminds me of this bit from "The Simpsons":

      Hypnotist: You are all very good players.
      Team: We are all very good players.
      Hypnotist: You will beat Shelbyville!
      Team: We will beat Shelbyville!
      Hypnotist: You will give one hundred and ten percent.
      Team: That's impossible, no one can give more than one hundred percent, by definition that is the most anyone can give.

      Besides, you're overlooking Fermat's Laster and Lastest theorems.
  28. Is there a webcam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Because I love to watch hot math action.

    No! no! Introduce a Lemma!
    Ya that's it, Proof by Counter-Example, that's the way I like it.

    1. Re:Is there a webcam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always wondered, is a lemma half of a dilemma?

  29. Yeah, but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who actually reads the FTA? the fact that it's modded up to +5 just gives more evidence to this fact. Or maybe, the mods think it's good that there's someone here trying to foster some kind of intelligent discussion. All the posts above this one are completely clueless.

  30. No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being Indian is totally irrelevant to the story - he is a professor in America! The university he works for is totally relevant, it has nothing to do with racism. If you want to mention his educational or biographical background as an addendum to the story, then sure, but it has ZERO to do with the academic work itself. Racism in society is still prevelant, sadly.

    1. Re:No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's sad is how many people, such as yourself, don't understand the difference between nationality and race. In the context of the article, "Indian" is referring to the fact that he is from the country of India. Since when is it racist to simply inform people of the location of someone's birth? Relevant or not, it's certainly not racist.

    2. Re:No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We'll use /. template #37 to explain this example of contemporary American ass-hattery:
      1. Use context-free factoid to "prove" jackass claim.
      2. ????
      3. Profit.

    3. Re:No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YHBT. HaND.

  31. not trolling but by avandesande · · Score: 1

    Why on slashdot?
    I dont have a clue what the proof is about, and it doesn't mention if he is going to use a computer to help with the proof.

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
    1. Re:not trolling but by Rostin · · Score: 1

      Are you sure you aren't trolling? :)

      Difference in opinion about /.'s purpose, perhaps. It is "News for Nerds" after all, and nerd-dom is not limited to computers.

    2. Re:not trolling but by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

      Why on slashdot?

      Because we don't know it he'll open source the answer, try to patent it, or if there'll be a bittorrent of the solution available.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  32. Incredible!!! by Aumaden · · Score: 3, Funny
    Wow, and to think, Utah's Net Porn law has only been in effect for 4.5 weeks.

    With this kind of progress, we should have FTL engines by the end of next year.

    1. Re:Incredible!!! by kwieland+in+stl · · Score: 1

      Either that or Duke Nukem Forever.

  33. Don't be so PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Being Indian is totally irrelevant to the story

    *sigh*

    But the story isn't using "Indian" in a racist way. It's merely an addition, perhaps to shed some "interesting" light on his background outside of his area of research. Not everything that mentions somebody's ethnicity is racist.

    You sound like one of those overly-PC people who make things difficult for everyone, just for the sake of trying to live up to some misplaced "holier than thou" moral code.

    Person1: "See those kids playing? One of them is my niece."
    Person2: "Which one?"
    Person1: "The black-haired one."
    Person2: "There are six of them."
    Person1: "The one in the blue shirt."
    Person2: "That leaves four..."
    Person1: "Ummm, the one with the sandals..."
    Person2: "Three..."
    Person1: "...and the red ball."
    Person1: "Oh, you mean the black girl? Cute kid."

    1. Re:Don't be so PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> You mean african-american, obviously. Or nigger.

      See the karma slipping away..... dumbass

    2. Re:Don't be so PC by M1FCJ · · Score: 1

      Who cares... I don't.

    3. Re:Don't be so PC by eclectic4 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Oh the day when informative identifiers won't have "some" people instantly associating them with derogatory sentiment, which is the true problem.

      --

      "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
    4. Re:Don't be so PC by computational+super · · Score: 1

      Like a few weeks ago... I was talking to somebody about the new black woman who sat next to me at work, who had recently come here from Nigeria. He said, in all seriousness, "The term is 'african-american' these days".

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    5. Re:Don't be so PC by bluGill · · Score: 1

      I have several 'black' friends who hate that term. They have never been to Africa, and have no intent to ever go there. (They wouldn't turn down a free vacation to one of the safe areas, but there are plenty of other places they would rather visit) They are Americans, born and raise in the USA and all that. They are no different from me, other minor genetic details.

  34. Offtopic? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Accorting TFA, the mathematician in question was a faculty member at TIFR before joining the faculty at the Univ of Utah.

    "Before he moved to the United States in 2004 to take up a position on the University of Utah faculty as Associate Professor, Dr. Khare was on the TIFR faculty for nearly a decade."

    Infact, his older webpage is here: http://www.tifr.res.in/scripts/show_hp.php?param=7 74&filename=acad.txt&terminalnodeid=5150

  35. Worried by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

    I'm kind of worried about him - the way he sits on that porch reminds me very much of Russell Crowe in A Beautiful Mind.

    (http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/25/stories/2005042 50 6530100.htm)

  36. Re:What is it about? (mod parent up!) by SlowMovingTarget · · Score: 1

    So we can expect to see lots of elliptic curves and modular functions in DNF... Does this mean they're going to use that new Imaginary engine instead of the Unreal engine?

  37. He's too modest... by xv4n · · Score: 0

    He did it to draw on more women.

  38. Umm, yeah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that's probably the reason why the slashdot post has it in quotes. You know, to indicate that it's what's in the article. Word for word. You didn't even need to RTFA to figure that one out smart guy.

  39. America! Fuck yeah! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Uh, where was he when he did this?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:America! Fuck yeah! by DjReagan · · Score: 1

      You *do* realise the difference between the words "and" and "or" don't you?

      --
      "When I grow up, I want to be a weirdo"
  40. Mathmatical expressions? by notherenow · · Score: 0

    I'm no math nut, but is this article in line with the most up-to-date mathmatical expressions? I read the article, but found that most of it looks like some unsupported HTML code that dates back when they first discovered that this was a mathmatical problem. Also, there is no, um, thing to understand? I mean, I RTFM, and I still don't understand WTF it's about... but, once a guy called me stupid.

    --
    We all dance, we all sing.
    -The Streets
  41. While it's interesting ... by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1
    How is better then when Andrew Wiles proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1994? I mean Khare's work is also based in part on the Taniyama-Shimura theorem.

    Besides neither one is what Fermat claimed to be his [never/loss documented] answer.

    --
    "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    1. Re:While it's interesting ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is it better then when Andrew Wiles proved Fermat's Last Theorem in 1994?

    2. Re:While it's interesting ... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      wiles proof was a round about proof, it was in his words not very nice. the proof of the Serre conjecture would indeed be a more direct and very nice method to prove fermat's last theorem.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    3. Re:While it's interesting ... by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      BTW.. there is no proof that Fermat had a solution that worked.. he may have thought he had one that worked, but in all likelihood his proof was flawed.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    4. Re:While it's interesting ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All Fermat stated in his documents is that he had a prof that the Diophantine equation x^n+y^n=z^n has no integer solutions for n > 2 and x, y, z cannot be 0. One of the biggest benefits of laying the framework for a logical bridge between number theory and geometry, is that there are many hard problems in each, with are trivial in the other. Mathematicians are very much 'give them an inch and they will take a mile' sort of people. Mathematical transforms (Fourier transforms, Z transforms, Laplace transforms, etc) are used in this way. This goes beyond what the solution to Fermats last theorum provided (even though it's one of the longer math proofs at 150 pages). It provides a bridge to understanding different kinds of problems in new ways. There are some who will say 'well if I can't make a profit out of it in the next quarter, then it's useless to me'. OK, so don't consider it important. Every discovery in science (including mathematics) for the last 1000 years met the same criticism.

    5. Re:While it's interesting ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are correct. There are many ways to skin a cat. What is 5? Is it 2+3 or 3+2 or 4+1 or 1+4 or 6-1 or 7-2??? And the answer is Yes, all of them. I remember having to solve an artificial intelligence problem when I was in university (and also program the computer to solve the problem...a less-trivial task). There were 35 steps to the solution, and it wasn't obvious at the beginning. I had solved the problem on paper, I ran my (correctly working) program. It came up with a different solution, so I (really did say to myself) 'that's not right' and went about tracing the solution to see what step was a mis-step. There were none. The computer solved it in a different way (but all of the steps were correct). Fermat might have had a solution that would have fitted on one page. He did not write it down. Modern proofs are good, they prove Fermat's hypothesis, but there is no certainty that they are the best way to solve (much like saying 1+1+1+1+1=5). Certainly a simple answer is easier than a complex one (calculating pi got easier after mathematicians in 1997 found a simple set of whole-number fractions that would solve it to an infinate number of decimal places). So perhaps Fermat did have a more elegant solution. We shall never know.

    6. Re:While it's interesting ... by psetzer · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't trust that Fermat really had a proof, much less one under 150 pages. He was a smart guy, but he's gotten a reputation for saying something is solved when it isn't. For instance, take the numbers 2**2**n+1. The first few are prime, so he threw in the towel after 65537 and said the whole damn lot is prime. Unfortunately, we haven't found one Fermat prime past the ones he listed, and some people have wondered if he found all of them. Looking at it a different way, after he formulated his 'proof', he wrote several proofs for specific cases of n=3,4,5.... This is like coming up with an elegant proof of the Pythagorean Theorem for n dimensions (not tough) and then going on to publish a different proof for the two-dimensional case. What's the point? I'm guessing that he finished with the book, thought about it for a bit, saw a gaping flaw in his 'proof' and didn't bother to go back and rescrawl his marginalia.

      If there's one thing that mathematicians like, it's generalizing proofs to as wide of an area as possible. If a proof hasn't been generalized as much as humanly possible, it's a very good sign that the author of the proof couldn't come up with a way to make it more general. One thing to remember in math is even if it sounds simple, there's no gurarantee that it is simple. For instance, given an interval (a,b) tell how many prime numbers are within that interval. Trivial to state, but computationally nasty to say the least. There's an 'obvious' solution, to count up all of the prime numbers between the two, but if you're looking for something elegant, sorry but it isn't there, that we really know of.

      --
      "Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is living in a state of sin." -- John von Neumann
    7. Re:While it's interesting ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suppose that for a prime p Fermat was wrong and:
      a^p + b^p = c^p has a non-trivial solution a,b,c. Then the elliptic curve y^2 = x(x-a^p) (x+b^p)
      has some very peculiar properties, so people thought that such a curve should not exist, thus implying that Fermat was finally right and FLT (Fermat's Last Theorem) is proved. One way of getting such a contradiction was Wiles' way: if the elliptic curve has the modularity property, then it can not exist. So Wiles proved this modularity property (the Taniyama-Shimura-Weil conjecture) thus proving FLT.
      But why did people suspected that this curve should not exist? Because since its coefficients are all p-powers it was known that its points of order p generate a field K with many nasty properties and so people believed that such a field K can not exist..(it should be too small and too big at the same time).

      Now, Serre's conjecture is proved in the level -1 case (in general very recently by Khare; but the particular case which is enough for the application to FLT was proved before by Khare-Wintenberger-Dieulefait), this means that it is proved directly that this field K can not exist, hence the elliptic curve cannot exist, hence FLT is true: without using the Taniyama-Shimura-Weil modularity conjecture proved by Wiles.

      This may be (or may not be!!) a more direct proof of FLT, but still it is too complicated: it is certainly not the one that Fermat had in mind.

  42. This guy is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #1 on the Mormon recruitment list. Sorry, LDS cultists, he's a Hindu (as evidenced by the web site at hindu.com). The "free" bible won't help you this time, there is little chance of enlisting this one. You'll have to wait until he's dead, then you can change his geneological records to reflect that he was a Mormon that graduated from BYU, just like you've done for so many before him.

    1. Re:This guy is by bobcave · · Score: 1

      He did a little too much LDS at Berkely.

      --
      There is no such thing as 'chocohol' or 'workahol'.
    2. Re:This guy is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Two major products came from Berkeley: LSD and Unix. This is probably not a coincidence." -- John Dodge in PCWeek Magazine

    3. Re:This guy is by NarrMaster · · Score: 1

      "Well, double dumbass on you!"

      --
      That's right. All your base.
    4. Re:This guy is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either:

      1) Your post was 38 characters long and you screwed it up.

      2) LDS is something I don't know about.

    5. Re:This guy is by samjam · · Score: 1

      LDS=Latter-day Saint, abbreviation of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, based in Utah. The guy in question is at the University of Utah.

      I'm not sure if that was the joke, but you said you didn't know what LDS is.

      He's a better joke, though:

      What do you get if you cross LDS with LSD?

      A high-priest!

      Sam

    6. Re:This guy is by weston · · Score: 1

      Parent may have been refering to a moment from Star Trek IV:

      "William Shatner (Kirk): Oh, him? He's harmless. Part of the free speech movement at Berkeley in the sixties. I think he did a little too much LDS."

      See here.

      The mere fact I know this may mean I'm not getting a date with anyone not in a Troi costume for a year or two.

  43. Hmmm... by MrByte420 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Waiting on a math major to give a long-winded set of analogies to make this somehow releevant to the masses....

    --
    If religous zealots don't believe in Evolution, then why are they so worried about bird flu?
    1. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Number theorists are well known to pride themselves on working on things that have no practical application. They actually got mad when cryptography started borrowing some ideas from number theory, and directed their research elsewhere. I'm not kidding.

    2. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will not bother to provide a set of analogies, because honestly the analogies don't cut it for things this complex and beautiful. If you really want to know the significance, learn some math. Let me indicate to you, however, that this result is a contribution to the Langlands programme, which is widely considered to be one of the deepest areas of modern mathematics. A proof of the Langlands conjectures would be one of the greatest achievements in the history of humankind, even when compared with achievements outside of mathematics.

  44. Re:erm by BitterAndDrunk · · Score: 1
    You don't consider numbers theory and higher math "nerdy" professions?

    What color is the sky in your world?

    --
    You better watch out, there may be dogs about . . .
  45. Home town boy ... by taniwha · · Score: 1

    The article is in an Indian newspaper, I'm sure a Utah paper would stress the fact that he's at a local university ...

  46. Re:He is a MARATHI (from the state of maharashtra) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, when we say Marathi we refer not only to the language but also to the people of that particular area/ethnicity/culture/language. Of course, one of the correct ways to refer to a person from Maharashtra in English is to say 'Maharashtrian', but it's not the only one. When we speak in Indian languages we almost exculsively use "Marathi" to refer to Maharashtrians. Of course, Marathi does not exactly refer to the state, but rather to the people of the culture of that state. Most of our songs/poems/literature use Marathi to refer to those people (which does not necessarily signify which state they are from. Remember, state were only formed about fifty years ago when we got independence. But the diversity existed long before.) And yeah, I must agree, Marathis talk too loud. And too much.

  47. ha by machine+of+god · · Score: 1
    From the wikipedia article:

    In 1961, Jean-Pierre Serre realized that classical algebraic-geometric ideas of multiplicity could be generalized using the concepts of homological algebra.

    I mean, obviously.

  48. Read the Subject Line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It says "Going BEYOND Fermat's Last Theorem".

  49. its never coming out by doctorjay · · Score: 1

    hah DNF .. ive been waiting for that forever...

  50. TIFR webpage by yodha · · Score: 1

    Webpage of TIFR (Tata Institute of Fundamental Research) mentioned in the article.

  51. link in story! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod this guy down, that link is given in the story in the word "solution". Try it yourself! idiot mods.

  52. But did he use the Quadratic formula? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [-b (+ or -) sqrt(b^2 - 4ac)] / 2a !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Beat that, baby!

    1. Re:But did he use the Quadratic formula? by Colourspace · · Score: 1

      thank you for reminding me of a million exam nightmares. No, really.

  53. Proof of Progress by SeanDuggan · · Score: 1
    {throws hands up in the air}
    Right... and while we're at it, no updates on things like space shuttles or Mars missions. It's not relevant until they complete their task after all.

    {catches falling hands, stuffs them in his pockets}
    That said, I kind of know where you're coming from. The world of media is such a fastpaced world that they dare not sit on a story for fear of being "scooped" by opposition. From their perspective, if this guy flops, they quietly drop the story and no one will remember them. On the other hand, if he succeeds, they can crow "We were there first!" and quite possibly get first coverage of his success. From the mathematician's perspective, he's just commenting on his progress to someone who seems an interested observer. Too, by getting an interview, he's getting publicity which may lead to further funding to his coffers to solve the problem. That's... not wrong, albeit something which does not sing to my soul.

    All in all, I think the article is reasonable if perhaps a bit misleading in title.

    --
    This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
  54. Re:Goatseman's wife discovered!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Parent is lying. There is no ring! Unless you uhh... nevermind.

  55. Serre's Conjecture by ThosLives · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I went hunting to find out what the Conjecture is since it appears to be so important, and stumbled across this It appears that this was already proved in 1976 and is now known as the Quillen-Suslin Theorem.

    I wonder, is there a second Serre's Conjecture, or do people not do research any more to see if their work has already been done? Every link I can find for Serre's Conjecture or Quillen-Suslin Theorem indicates that it has already been proved (Quillen got the Fields medal in 1978).

    --
    "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    1. Re:Serre's Conjecture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that the article states the current work has been published on arxiv and submitted to journals for review. So, it's definitely not acadmically adjudicated.

  56. Re:More importantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The word "algorithm" sounds a bit like "Al Queda", AND its foreign, too. Who knows what evil terrorists could use these things for...

    Time to launch a war on math

  57. MOD PARENT DOWN by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    This is pure psychobabble like something lifted out of Star Trek. And it gets modded up!

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  58. I'm way ahead of you by mdudzik · · Score: 1

    Here's my two part solution to winning the lottery:

    1) Buy a ticket
    2) Verify the winning number.

    I have actually completed the first step.

    I'm a little stuck on part 2), but I'm really poised.

    1. Re:I'm way ahead of you by Da+Penguin · · Score: 1

      But assuming P=NP, since it's pretty easy to verify a ticket to be correct, it should be just as easy to find the winning ticket to begin with!

      Ergo, I only need to prove P=NP, then I'll be a millionaire.

  59. Re:erm by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm a pure mathematician and I think this story is both uninteresting and irrelevant. It's not nerdy at all. It's a parochial feel-good story for Indians but unfortunately, because it's available over the world, that's to the Web, it's been mistaken for relevant story about something interesting.

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  60. For those who don't get it by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 1

    Fermat claimed he found a truely remarkable proof for his theorem, but he also claimed that the margin was too small to contain it. The parent is a nice meme of that quote.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:For those who don't get it by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      from what i can gather the most likely explanation is that fermat had a false proof which did not survive but he didn't get rid of the margin note for whatever reason

      if he had a real proof of the general case why would he have done a proof of the n=4 special case later?

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  61. Re:More importantly by NarrMaster · · Score: 3, Funny

    We need to find some Weapons of Math Instruction...

    --
    That's right. All your base.
  62. Slashdot and mathematics breakthroughs... by hanssprudel · · Score: 5, Informative

    This site does not have a very good record with mathematical breakthroughs that it runs on the front page. Just to give some examples:

    1) A year and a half ago Slashdot ran a story (along with most of the MSM) about a Swedish girl having solved the 16th Hilbert problem. That turned out to be a completely bogus claim - she had, in fact, proved nothing.

    2) Slashdot ran with there being infinitely many twin primes. The proof was flawed.

    3) No, the Riemann hypothesis (the most coveted result in all of Mathematics) has not been proved.

    Those are just the examples I can remember off hand. There have been several more, and I cannot think of a single one that has turned out to actually be true. So please take vague stories about being "poised to make a great story" from local press with a pretty hefty grain of salt...

    1. Re:Slashdot and mathematics breakthroughs... by avandesande · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Methinks that mathmatics is a fertile ground for boondogglers who are willing to do *anything* to get a story submitted on /. I think that if the editors can't figure out WTF the article is about they shouldn't post it.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    2. Re:Slashdot and mathematics breakthroughs... by ztbb · · Score: 1

      I can't vouch for all the details in the most technical parts of the paper, but I have read Khare's paper carefully and the overall strategy of the proof is correct. If there were a mistake, I would be surprised if it had not been found already -- this paper is not nearly as complicated as some of the ones to which you refer that didn't pan out.

    3. Re:Slashdot and mathematics breakthroughs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Math is non-sexy, it's the only real science out there anymore. Taniyma-Shimura was proven a couple years back, where was the fanfair? It's huge, it's the kind of thing could aid in proving the twin-prime conjecture. We'll be using that shit for a long long time to prove new and interesting things. Why no ticker-tape parade? Because you have to know a lot of math to understand what it means. Let's face it, the general public can't understand a story about prime numbers without them being defined in it. Pop math is limited to the bullshit that is easy to understand and that stuff just doesn't happen to get proven very often and generally doesn't matter so much when it is proven.


      Riemann on the other hand, sexy as it is, won't be proven and that's a good thing. At least that's my gut feel for it; I don't think it can be proven and the best we'll do is prove that. I might be wrong but you have to look on all Riemann attempts with skepticsm, no one has come remotely close. It's been a relatively recent thing that we've been able to really verify it with computers to any interesting level... Sexiest thing out there and how many people even understand what it's about? Try explaining that to anyone, best you can do it show them is the seive trick (did one of the Bernoulli's figure that out? It sounds like something Euler would have done..) and then, unless they are a real math person they sort of glaze over. Funny thing, to a casual observer, just that much is fascinating and that's been proven, it's just a simple algorithm. One of the sexiest math discoveries you could make and just imagine trying to explain it. It's like the continuum hypothesis, we're lucky that one can't be proven; I can just see Katie Couric frowning as she tried to comprehend countably infinite vs. incontably infinite on the Today show. "So what are these 'imaginary numbers' you speak of. Is this like that Fur-matt thing they proved a while back?" Imagine the catastrophic let down that would be..


      I think it just is a reflection of the pop-science culture we live in. Science isn't sexy, it's not exciting that often, it's a tireless challenge where you may be wrong, you may be really wrong, in fact you're usually wrong and you may be really right and more often than not there isn't an exciting press-release about it. People want to punch some numbers in to a computer, run a simulation and make a press release about global warming being worse than predicted by last year's simulation. Or they want to watch some hot chick spray some shit on a crime scene and have all the blood glow in the dark so that they can catch the killer in 40 minutes, that's what science is these days. No mention of error, accuracy, assumption, any of that shit. Math isn't so kind, if you can't prove it then you shut the hell up and keep trying. If you can't prove your assumptions or the steps you used, the conversation usually ends.

  63. Re:More importantly by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

    Hah! America is imperious to your weapons!

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  64. A story by Carthag · · Score: 4, Funny

    I heard a better story, but I have no idea if it's true or not.

    There was a guy from Jamaica who had to go to the hospital for some reason, and he was driven there by his friend. When filling out the forms, he neglected to fill out the race field, and the receptionist nurse told him that he should check African-American.

    He tried to explain to her that he was neither African nor American, even showing her his passport. Eventually he had to point out his (white) friend, who as coincidence has it was of South African descent and an American citizen. An African American, so to speak.

    Regrettably, I don't remember how the whole thing ended.

    1. Re:A story by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      > Regrettably, I don't remember how the whole thing ended.

      The Imp Q came down and vaporized the entire universe for being filled with idiots like that PC person, then recreated it exactly as it was before.

      No denizens ever knew it, either. =(

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:A story by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      The Carribean islands are part of the Americas.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    3. Re:A story by spuzzzzzzz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So is Mexico. Are Mexicans Americans? What about Chileans?

      --

      Don't you hate meta-sigs?
    4. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are Mexicans Americans? What about Chileans?

      Yes. Yes too.

    5. Re:A story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      They surely are Americans as well... "technically". For some odd reason the world has equated American as people who are from the United States of America only but America is actually North, Central and South America. Chile is in South America which is part of America thus they are Americans, although we really don't refer to them as Americans :P

    6. Re:A story by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Aussie stereotype's: Canadians, Mexicans, South Americans and Yanks :)

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  65. Re:He is a MARATHI (from the state of maharashtra) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, you correctly refer to these people as "curries" tyvm.

  66. mod up by SparafucileMan · · Score: 1

    do it.

  67. A little exposition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Glancing over the responses so far, I've come across several links to "the" Serre conjecture. Of course, since this is Slashdot (Land of the Karma Whore) it also looks like not a one of those referred to the conjecture relevant to this discussion.

    The particular conjecture of Serre that matters here focuses on the two-dimensional representations over a finite field of the Galois group Gal(Qbar/Q). Now since that's not particularly illuminating, let me say a bit more...

    First, Qbar denotes the algebraic completion of the rational numbers -- that is, all the stuff you need to add to the rationals so that you can do stuff like factor polynomials with rational coefficients. So things like sqrt(2) are in Qbar, but transcental numbers like pi aren't.

    Gal(Qbar/Q) is the group of symmetries of Qbar over Q -- the ways you can map it to itself while still preserving multiplication and addition, and leaving the rational numbers inside Qbar alone. For instance, complex conjugation gives an element of the Galois group.

    Now one way to understand any group of symmetries is by looking at its "linear representations" -- basically, ways of assigning matrices to each of the symmetries so that matrix multiplication matches up with the composition of symmetries.

    The conjecture talked about here claims to describe (in some sense) all such (irreducible) representations of Gal(Qbar/Q), at least if you limit yourself to 2x2 matrices and coefficients in a finite field.

    This is similar to the Langlands Correspondence, which (among other things) deals with representations of Gal(Qbar/Q) by complex matrices (though not just 2x2).

    1. Re:A little exposition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! This guy is so obviously fake!

      Any real mathemetician would know there is no such thing as "transcental" numbers. STOP YOUR DAMN KARMA WHORING!!!

      .
      .
      .

      Ok, just kidding, I know it's just a spelling error. This is the only serious post here that makes any sense to me. (And I know ACs don't get karma).

    2. Re:A little exposition by Coryoth · · Score: 1

      Thank you! Serre had a lot of conjectures and there has been a surprising amount of misinformation floating around here about what he's claiming to have a start on proving. I'm glad someone who actually knows what they are talking about bothered to weigh in.

      Jedidiah.

  68. Thank you. by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1
    Wiles' proof was a round about proof, it was in his words not very nice.

    Yeah, I know he never thought it was great but I wonder how much pressure he felt to find Fermat's proof and not just one that worked. (As I'm sure you know) rumor had it Fermat solved it in a single page book margin, something that seems rather suspect leaving open the idea Fermat actually never correctly solved it.

    I'm interested to see how Khare uses Taniyama-Shimura. Could FLT ever be proven without it?

    Great reply 2nd_coming. Thanks again.

    --
    "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    1. Re:Thank you. by Sage+Gaspar · · Score: 1

      I think it's pretty much accepted that Fermat didn't have a proof. He had claimed the same thing about several mistaken proofs in the past, and I believe he proved a specific case in later correspondence, which would be wasted effort if he had already proved the general case.

    2. Re:Thank you. by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1
      I think it's pretty much accepted that Fermat didn't have a proof.

      Yeah, but finding it in some ways has turned into the search for the holy grail. The discoverer becomes a mathematics god.

      --
      "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    3. Re:Thank you. by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      well.. it is either true or not true.. there is a solution either way. it is not like there is nothing to find, so it is not a holy grail search.. it is more like trying to find that sock that disappeared from the wash. you will eventually find it, and when you do you will have discovered a whole bunch of other cool crap.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  69. Great, Another Chandrashekhar by adavies42 · · Score: 1

    What is it with guys named Chandrashekhar and math?

    --
    Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
    -kfg
  70. The inevitable reply to any Fermat posting... by amightywind · · Score: 1

    I have a remarkable proof to this assertion but the web page is too small to contain it.

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
  71. Best Book On Math Ever? by bugeaterr · · Score: 1
    Fermat's Enigma by Simon Singh.

    I was pleasantly suprised to find that a book about a mathematical proof would be one of the most interesting books I've ever read.

    It's really a series of biographies of mathematicians who contributed to the solution over the 350 years it went unsolved.
    Like Sophie Germain, who in the 18th century gained admittance to the misogynist Ecole Polytechnique by taking over the identity of a former male student.
    Her brilliance ultimately lead to her exposure, but by then the patriarchy could not deny her.

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385 493622/qid=1114457128/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-565339 9-2050337?v=glance&s=books
  72. Re:Pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What slashdot really needs is a "-1: Stupid" moderation option. (This not really being troll, nor flamebait, ...)

  73. Longhorn... by sac13 · · Score: 1

    An anonymous member of the Longhorn team has stated that the proof will be included in Longhorn. Other problems to be solved by Longhorn are perpetual motion and cold fusion.

  74. Indian finally does something, and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He only posted it because he's an Indian and the mathematician is an Indian.
    Really, if all the non-Indians posted to slashdot about what their brethren have accomplished, slashdot would quickly turn into a 1000-post-a-day math forum.

    1. Re:Indian finally does something, and... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "1000-post-a-day" - about 1 in 6 people on the planet are Indian?

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  75. Not completely true by g8oz · · Score: 1, Informative

    "Of the six (trigonometry functions), five seem to be essentially Arabic in origin; only the sine function was introduced into Islam from India."

    http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/phys/alshukri/PHYS215/ Islamic%20astronomy.htm

    I have to add, while the role of Islamic science in preserving and transmitting knowledge from Greek, Egyptian, Chinese and Indian
    societies was important, it wasn't the only one. Muslim scientists did a lot of ground breaking work in astronomy, medicine, geometry and algebra.

    Abu Bakr al-Razi (844-926) made the first connection between bacteria and infection.
    Omar Khayyam better known as a poet, made significant contributions to the solution of cubic equations
    by geometric methods involving the intersection of conics.
    Nassereddine al-Tusi is credited as the founder of modern trigonometry, separating it from astronomy.

    Google for more if you are interested.

    As a side note, any time you hear a scientific type term starting with 'al' it came from Arabic. That
    includes algebra, algorithim, alcohol, alkali

    1. Re:Not completely true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about AlGore, inventor of the Internet?

  76. To Clarify and Refute by DumbSwede · · Score: 1
    I find your remarks a bit stinging. As to that I may be "an armchair mathematician/physicist" I guess you would consider that a pejorative. I would consider myself kept quite abreast of developments in physics and quantum mechanics in a layman's sense.

    It has been known for decades that electrons can only inhabit certain discrete shells of probability about the nucleolus of an atom. Similarly for the nucleolus, the protons and neutrons can only take up certain desirable configurations. We don't know all the details of how this comes to happen, but the laws of geometry and topology govern it, perhaps as a result of actions taking place in dimensions above the normal 3+1. This might give us another tool in predicting what these stable configurations might be on the elementary particle scale, whether they are electron orbits, or atomic nucleolus configurations, or quark bindings in mesons. This is what I was trying to say. Maybe I said it poorly, I was trying to be concise. Maybe this is still a string of fancy sounding words with no common thread to you.

    I appreciate the kind words from StillNeedMoreCoffee in this mater. I was trying to be vague enough to include the possibility that it might have implication in Quantum Computing. In trying to be as general as possible perhaps I muddy my meaning and message. The reference to near Infinite was indeed a reference or guess has to how these possible configurations are settled into, by some not yet understood quantum mechanical operation that allows many things to be tried in parallel before deciding on the optimal solution and collapsing into it.

    As to the Karma Whoring accusation, having looked at your log, you post often and get points, are you a Karma Whore? What would be the difference between us? I have had Excellent Karma for over two years. I care little for Karma and post to try to state opinions and get feedback. Feedback that is corrective or informative is the best. Yours would not pass that test.

    If wanting to have a thread of discussion with others on my take of things is Karma Whoring then so be it. I would have thought this was the whole reason for Slashdot.

    You make me sad. On the other hand you have challenged me to explain myself better, but I doubt that was your intent.

    1. Re:To Clarify and Refute by coopex · · Score: 1

      "It has been known for decades that electrons can only inhabit certain discrete shells of probability about the nucleolus of an atom. Similarly for the nucleolus, the protons and neutrons can only take up certain desirable configurations. We don't know all the details of how this comes to happen, but the laws of geometry and topology govern it, perhaps as a result of actions taking place in dimensions above the normal 3+1." Um, this is pure crap. Get out Griffths Intro to QM, read find the part where you calculate electron wavefunction psi around the NUCLEUS ( where you get the S, P, D, F, etc orbitals in chem, they get even more complicated - take a look http://www.orbitals.com/orb/orbtable.htm ) by seperation into spherical coordinates, and you see that topology and geometry have nothing to do with it. Furthermore, if you read some of Griffiths, you actually calculate that electorns spend approximate 1*10^-15 s *inside* the nucleus, you can prove Feynman's senior thesis, and other incredibly interesting stuff. Once you get into actual physics, its like tasting caviar coming from eating rice cakes, you'll never go back. So throw away A Brief History of Time and whatever Greene wrote, and read Einstein's highly accessable papers http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7328143/ or such instead, I highly recommend it.

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  77. It'll be a cold day in fusion hell... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Utah again huh? And nearly 10 years later I'm paying $2 fifty at the gas pump. Riiiiight...

  78. James Haris by xihr · · Score: 1

    Where's James Harris when you need him?

    1. Re:James Haris by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's probably already convinced that there's a simpler proof consisting heavily of square roots. Of course he'll let sci.math compose the actual proof...

  79. Me Too! by farquharsoncraig · · Score: 1

    yee-haw, fellow Utes on slashdot!

    1. Re:Me Too! by Piewalker · · Score: 1

      What year did ya graduate? Or are you currently attending?

    2. Re:Me Too! by farquharsoncraig · · Score: 1

      I'm not really a true Ute, actually, but I did do undergraduate research for the cosmic ray people for about 2 years. Nice campus, good place to work, though that can probably be said about many institutions of higher learning; the ivory tower will be welcoming to all who are looney enough to love science as much.

  80. Speaking of Indians... by hardwarejunkie9 · · Score: 1

    I was looking over the name and it rung a few bells, however, our quantum mechanics geeks in here might remember a certain law about the creation of black holes known as Chandraskhar's Limit Not related apparently, but worth reading up on. Does the name just build geniuses or something *peers around warily*

    --
    I like losing arguments, it just means that I can take your point and make it my own.
  81. what's the new icon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So is the icon for this category pi (as related to circles) or the PNT (Prime Number Theorem)?

    Too much geek character-set overloading can only lead to more drunk collegiate objects in need of proper garbage collection,

  82. Serre conjecture? by onemorechip · · Score: 1

    Can someone give a short explanation of this conjecture -- small enough to fit in the margin of a book, say?

    --
    But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
  83. I thought algebra started... by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

    There's no disputing the invention of Zero as Indian (AFAIK), but I seem to recall reading that algebra was considered "created" in the Islamic world when they began to substitute "symbols" for numbers.

    1. Re:I thought algebra started... by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Hmm... I might have been talking utter rubbish there. The wikipedia link further down the page would seem to indicate that there were lots of incremental steps....

  84. You Don't have to be a woman to be Macho by Pegasus5327t · · Score: 1

    Wonder Woman Where Did You Go Without Us? SOMEWHENELSE I GUESS!! Chandrashekhar Here's the true story of Sophie Germain, an 18th-century woman who assumed a man's identity in order to pursue her passion -- attempting to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/proof/germain.html

    --
    If you're not cheating you're not trying.
  85. That's a bunch of crap. by tjstork · · Score: 1

    It is ridiculous to blame the present state of Islamic nations on the Mongols or the Crusades.

    First off, the USA did not even exist when the Mongols or Crusades happened, yet, has easily surpassed the greatest achievements of the middle east within a scant two hundred years. Americans did, after all, put a man on the moon.

    Secondly, the Japan and Germany were both completely destroyed during World War II through its bombing campaigns, and those nations both have bounced back. The Mongols did not fire bomb Baghdad.

    To have a scientific society, you have to have some pre-requisites:

    a) You have to accept scientific findings when they clash with religious findings. You have to admit that whatever holy book you believe in is not the only source of knowledge, and -gasp- is probably wrong. Even the Communists could manage that one, which is why despite Russia going to hell in a handbasket economically, they beat the USA into space.

    b) You have to have a society which accepts open communications on scientific matters, as a minimum, and encourages open communication altogether. Again, even under Russian communism, they could communicate relatively freely about matters of science. But more so in western nations can scientists communicate, and that is why the west leads in technology.

    Islamic societies do not have these prerequisites.

    Religious leaders have real political power, and Islam, religious leaders hold that, because Islam is a "practical religion", they can rule on all aspects of life. Every time someone says anything, you get some two bit cleric tossing out a fatwah or declaring a jihad about topics that they aren't remotely qualified to speak to. In the west, if someone asks a question, the thing to do is to run an experiment and find out. In Islam, the thing to do, is ask a cleric, who makes something up.

    Islamic societies have achieved nothing despite vast investment.

    The transfer of American money into the middle east is one of the largest transfers of capital in human history. Since the end of World War II, America has purchased probably close to 20 trillion dollars worth of oil from the middle east. Where has all this money gone? Are there new technology centers in the middle east? Is the middle east producing any new drugs to fight disease with? Is the middle east even a banking center? Nope, no and no. Instead, they just sit on that oil and take their money and just waste it, the same way they sat on world trade routes and wasted their money when they were a great empire.

    It's time for Islamic countries to stop blaming their failures on everyone else but themselves.

    --
    This is my sig.
  86. Read, reflect, and then go away! by Imran · · Score: 1

    So much nonsense that its hard to know where to start...

    1) My mention of the Mongol invasion was simply a statement of historical fact. You implied that it was Islam which stopped Arab scientific progress. I INFORMED you that:
    a) Arabs started progressing scientifically AFTER they became Muslim, not before
    b) Arab scientific progress WAS more or less stopped in its tracks after the Mongol invasions.

    Those are facts. Easily researched. So, in conclusion, I do not agree with your assertion that Islam was the reason for stagnation.

    Whether you approve of how the Arab world handled the aftermath of the Mongols is neither here nor there.

    2) I did not blame the current state of the Muslim Ummah on the Mongols or the Crusades. I put those events into their proper historical perspective. They happened, they had a profound and lasting effect. Thats called history.

    Your logic is faulty if you imply from that that I was arguing that this excuses the current state of the Muslim world. I didn't even broach that topic.

    3) Each dominant civilisation stands on the shoulders of the dominant civilisations which preceeded it. The Egyptians built on the Mesopotamians. The Greeks built on the Egyptians. The Romans built on the Greeks. The Arabs built on what the Greeks, Chinese and Indians provided. Europe built on the advances made by the Arabs.

    At each stage, the rate of progress increases. Civilisation and technological prowess, generally speaking, tends to follow a linearly upward path.

    Consequently, comparing the rate of progress made by the US is misleading - tantamount to dishonesty. They built on the foundations others had laid (see above, as well as the British).

    The successor dominant civilisation to the US will themselves, in all likelihood exceed the rate of progress achieved by the Americans.

    4) "You have to accept scientific findings when they clash with religious findings"

    Really? Are you actually aware of a significant instance where Islam actually contradicted scientific findings?

    Or are you just assuming that because Christianity (to take an example) was incompatible with many facets of scientific progress over the centuries (Copernicus, Galileo, etc), that the same must be true of Islam as well?

    An ignorant assumption.

    5) "In the west, if someone asks a question, the thing to do is to run an experiment and find out. In Islam, the thing to do, is ask a cleric, who makes something up."

    This is just so stupid that I hardly know how to respond.

    6) "It's time for Islamic countries to stop blaming their failures on everyone else but
    themselves."

    I wasn't. To paraphrase (for your benefit), I would propose that its time for people like you to stop heaping half-baked, false accusations against Islam and Muslims when you are so ignorant of the matters at hand.

    In conclusion:
    You have 2 paths you can follow.

    1) Realise that your world view is not as informed as you thought it was, come down off your pedestal and learn some more before spouting nonsense. You may become a better person for it.

    2) Stay in your current blinkered mindset. Keep persuading yourself that you are not a bigot. Continue to associate with like minded people who will make you feel better about your beliefs. Keep your TV tuned to Fox News 24/7. You'll feel better about yourself - even if it is all hogwash.

    In either case, there really is no point in arguing the matter further with people like you. So, lets stop here.

  87. group action on a set by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cracked up our whole class. but to weigh in on the topic at hand. i do think that quantum and ring theory are deeply connected and geometry/topology is strongly connected to gr, so the more connections the better. after all isnt unification of gr and quantum the holy grail.

    to all the guys not seeing the connection research noether.. her theorem is kinda famous and deeply importaint for physics. now check out tfa ... thats right its about notherian rings.. duh

  88. I will not go away. by tjstork · · Score: 1

    I should also mention that my criticisms are equally valid for Christianity to. They are universal. For example, christian fundamentalist efforts to ban teaching of evolution, efforts to reject the results of carbon or radioisotope dating, or to control cultural values through the government, are just as damaging to American democracy as Islamic clerics are to the prospect of democracy in Iran.

    I asked a cleric point blank, on the pro-islam web site, why there was no separation of church and state in Islam, and he said flat out it that it was because no seperation was necessary as Islam was a practical religion and the Koran held all the truths. This is the same kind of answer that we get from our own fundamentalists here and the results of that are generally non-conducive to science.

    I've long argued that a democracy in the middle east is possible and have supported President Bush's efforts to bring Democracy to Iraq. On the other hand, those who are against the idea of democracy in the middle east generally believe that arabs are "animals" and are incapable of forming an elected government. I reject that position and I say, yes, I do think that arabs can build a democracy, but I say that knowing that those arabs working to do so are bringing with them a new kind of islam that addresses some of the criticisms that I have mentioned.

    IF the experiments in Iraq and Afghanistan succeed, then yes, we can look back and view it as a turning point where Islamic states began to move towards modern times. But, barring those two nations, there is not much movement. There is no free press in Saudi Arabia or Iran. There is no wide open internet in Iran.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:I will not go away. by Imran · · Score: 1

      I am a fool for responding futher, but here goes...

      Islam IS a practical religon. It does NOT hinder scientific progress. It is NOT the reason why Muslims are in their current state.

      Whatever effect organised Christian churches and beliefs have had/do have on Western society has got NOTHING to do with the dynamic of Islam in Muslim societies.

      Islam != Christianity
      Islam + civil society != Christianity + civil society

      You are essentially arguing that Muslims should relegate Islam because Christianity holds back scientific progress. Unbelievably stupid!

      "I've long argued that a democracy in the middle east is possible and have supported President Bush's efforts to bring Democracy to Iraq."

      That is the problem in a nutshell. You impose your beliefs on others. You impose your own value systems, and your own solutions on others. What works for you may in fact be worse than the initial problem, when applied to others.

      Yes, Muslims need to uplift themselves. Part of that is finding out what kind of governmental and civil structure works today. FOR THEM.

      It took the West centuries of internecine warfare before they came to some kind of conclusion over the role of THEIR church in THEIR states. Following that, it was Westerners who then created a whole other set of 'isms, which plunged the world into chaos for most of the 20th century.

      And you judge us as having failed because, a scant half century or so after independence (varies across countries), we are still groping around for the right solution?

      Hypocritical in the extreme.

      For Muslims to uplift themselves, its an evolutionary process. With many setbacks. One critical element is the absolute need to work this out amongst ourselves.

      Give us ONE decade without your snouts in our affairs, and then come back and see. Regimes which govern against the dictates of Islam, and exploit their own people, need to be allowed to fall - and not propped up by outsiders.

      Its illuminating that you allude to the same ignorant arguments about Iran. I am NOT a Shia. I do criticise many things which happen in Iran. But the important thing is that they are working it out themselves. Gradually. They went from one extreme (the Shah) to the other (immediate aftermath of the Revolution), and are now starting to regulate the pendulam shifts.

      They do have elections. They do have a genuine discourse within their state. They do have freedom (freedoms within, and freedom from most forms of Western interference). How they will continue to evolve will be interesting to see. These things take time.

      How much could the Taliban have modified their extremism over the years, after an Afghan civil war had been concluded, would also have been interesting.

      You seem to think that because someone or some group is incapable of going in, taking over a country, and slapping into place a system of Islamic governance which works flawlessly from day one is proof positive that it can never work.

      What utter tosh.

      And instead, you are yours are going around the Middle East, demanding that they adopt your systems and your beliefs, and bombing and slaughtering all those who disagree and stand in your way. And I haven't even mentioned oil.

      Err, just who are the fundamentalists exactly? And who is fighting for freedom?

    2. Re:I will not go away. by tjstork · · Score: 1

      You want an end to western interference? I'm all about that!

      I cannot wait for the day that we in the west perfect nuclear fusion, adopt nuclear power, switch to biodiesel and fuel cell cars and pull the plug on the whole billion dollar lifeline we prop your feable caliphates up with.

      Then, Islamic states will have absolutely nothing to offer and they will be begging for the West to continue its interference of a hundreds of billions of dollars that a year it so ungratefully spits on today.

      For a merchant people, Islamic nations have certainly shown no appreciation for the business of the west, have had the -worst- customer service in the history of humanity. We in the West have invested billions of dollars into the middle east and at every turn we have been spit on for it.

      If the governments of Islam fundamentalists are so great for the people, as you say, then why not dispense with the check that the mullahs have on them, and let the people elect leaders with real power and not puppets that can be undermined by clerics on a whim. Let the people choose their religion themselves, and not be compelled by any law or force of arms to do that.

      Face it, the reforms you speak of in Iran are a futile farce. Your mullahs are all money grubbing frauds, in Iran, in the Taliban you love so much, even in Iraq. For all this talk of spiritual bliss and living completely before god, these holy men of yours show a surprisingly secular willingness to gather all power and money for themselves, and a supreme willingness to martyr everyone else but themselves.

      --
      This is my sig.
    3. Re:I will not go away. by tjstork · · Score: 1

      And again, I add that our Christian religious leaders are money grubbing frauds for the most part, as are the leaders of most religious and political groups. It's just human nature - if you can invent the rules of the book of god, why not use that power to cash in?

      --
      This is my sig.
  89. Shame on you by Imran · · Score: 1

    Hmm, what do we have here?

    Completely irrational ravings, replete with half-truths and outright lies. You are just shouting from the 'raving anti Muslim' hymn book, without any realisation that much of what you say is completly untrue.

    There is so much nonsense in what you say, and such bile in the world view behind it, that I just cannot even start to refute it. Its like trying to convince a committed Nazi why they shouldn't regard Slavs and Jews as sub-human. No matter what one says, they wouldn't get it.

    You didn't even understand what little I tried to convey. I don't love the Taliban - never said that I did. Reforms in Iran? You have no clue about what society is actually like in Iran, or what level of empowerment the people there do or do not have.

    Being deeply ignorant about a subject or a people isn't great - but noone can know everything about everything. However, being deeply ignorant about a people, and simultaneously holding strong and harsh views about them is simply unconscionable.

    In a sick sort of way, you really are as much of a fundamentalist as those you despise. You started off by lauding the scientific spirit as one which holds knowledge and the quest for knowledge as everything. And yet you cannot bear to subject your own world view to an examination by the facts.

    Here's one fact to throw a spanner in your works. Digest this, and see how it fits in your perspective on things.

    Some of the Prophet (peace be upon him) most famous sayings:
    "The ink of the scholar is more holy than the blood of the martyr"
    "You should go even to the walls of China for learning'
    "The man who educates 2 daughters has built a wall in between himself and hell"

    I dare you to dip your toe in the water and educate yourself about the reality of Islam and Muslims, before you continue to preach nonsense about them.

    Do that with an OPEN MIND (as all good scientists would), and then preach what you like. Until then, keep your opinions to yourself.

    Whatever I say to you simply goes in one ear and out the other - with no processing in between. There is only so much I can say to a brick wall. This conversation is at an end.

  90. Some quotes from the Koran by tjstork · · Score: 1

    Ok, some quotes from the Koran, which I incidentally read.

    "Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage"

    "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate."

    "Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient"

    Look, the Koran is an old book and riddled with as much contradiction and cruelty as the Christian bible. But obviously most Muslims are just people , and can interpret the goodness within it for themselves and arrive at a just society. God imbues every Muslim with a soul, not just the Mullahs, so, in light of that, why should not God decide that only a special set of "mullahs" should hold political power? Why should the interpretation of the Koran by a bad Mullah be better than the good works of a good Muslim citizen? Who is closer to the divine, the Ayatollah Khoemini that ordered so many people killed that opposed Islam, or, the westernized Islamic student that might cure cancer and save millions of muslims? Who would have more of a right to lead a nation? A man that has memorized the Koran or an economist?

    Look, if the people of the middle east democratically elect a fundamentalist Islamic state and decide for themselves that they would rather not have as much technical or economic progress in order to satisfy their spiritual goals, that's fine. Just don't go blaming the West for making that decision, that's all!

    --
    This is my sig.
  91. Going Beyond Fermat's Last Theorem by Pierrot+Lefou · · Score: 1

    One part of Serre's conjectures was proved some time ago by Ribet and Edixhoven, and this was used as part of the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. I have found on the web that the recent proof of some cases of Serre's conjecture is currently being explained by Edixhoven in two talks "On Serre's conjecture in level one [Khare, Wintenberger, Dieulefait]", at: www.math.leidenuniv.nl/~gabor/geom_sem.html, and by Ribet in: "The modularity of some mod p Galois representations": "I will sketch the main ideas of recent preprints of Khare-Wintenberger and Dieulefait that allow one to establish certain cases of Serre's conjectures", at: http://www.cms.math.ca/Events/summer05/abs/Plenm.h tml

  92. What about the coauthors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Searching with google, in some serious webpages this new result about Serre's reciprocity conjecture is atributed to Khare together with other two french authors.