Slashdot Mirror
Kazakh Professor Claims Solution of Another Millennium Prize Problem
An anonymous reader writes "Kazakh news site BNews.kz reports that Mukhtarbay Otelbaev, Director of the Eurasian Mathematical Institute of the Eurasian National University, is claiming to have found the solution to another Millennium Prize Problems. His paper, which is called 'Existence of a strong solution of the Navier-Stokes equations' and is freely available online (PDF in Russian), may present a solution to the fundamental partial differentials equations that describe the flow of incompressible fluids for which, until now, only a subset of specific solutions have been found. So far, only one of the seven Millennium problems was solved — the Poincaré conjecture, by Grigori Perelman in 2003. If Otelbaev's solution is confirmed, not only it might be the first time that the $1 million offered by the Clay Millennium Prize will find a home (Perelman refused the prize in 2010), but also engineering libraries will soon have to update their Fluid Mechanic books."
Oh no. Textbook publishers HATE having to do that....
'more that', instead of 'more that'
So much irony it is delicious...
If it is such an important article, why did he not find someone to translate it to English? He did get some related papers published in English. It seems that those are about approximations. Interesting non the less.
Aren't you missing a "sarcasm" tag?
It's P=NP, you insensitive clod!
I think you're confusing science with technology and engineering.
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
Clearly both P and N are 1.0
"His name was James Damore."
In his bio it is claimed that he found explicit formulas for n-particle motion in the space (in the framework of Einstein’s relativity theory). If that would be true, I guess it would have be known in the rest of the world as well, if he had.
great. another reason for "oh, you need to buy new textbooks for the class this semester".
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
At least they'd have a good reason this time.
Eurasian National University?
I thought 1984 was fiction...
Otelbaev has published in some very respected journals, and trained with the very top people. His work is worth serious scrutiny. Of course, it is easy, even for the most brilliant scholars, to make a mistake which makes it look as if a big problem has fallen. Skepticism, but no mockery, please.
Kind of butt-ironic then they often aped capitalist rewards by giving housing upgrades and other goodies to scientists who made a mark on the world stage, much like Olympic athletes.
They are dancing people, singing for their supper for dictators who have artificially restricted the market for maximum control...of political opponents.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I take exception to the use of the word "Claim" here. I never see this used for American or Western professionals?
In fact here on Slashdot we have a story about "Cheshire Cat" observations by a group and "Claim" wasn't used there.
You (Slashdot) are being highlighted for your stereotypes and western aligned views again.
You're very wrong on all points I'm afraid. This will have zero impact on any CFD codes. And where did you get the (slightly ridiculous) idea that CFD programs only solve for special cases? It's true that most restrict themselves in some way, e.g. "subsonic and non-turbulent", but otherwise they are completely general. Source: my PhD work consists of writing a CFD code for Navier-Stokes. (The summary talking about rewriting textbooks is also way off on their understanding. This will likely be incomprehensible without a PhD in the right area of mathematics.)
for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
Look mommy, I did a Google.
Was your post plain ignorance or a bit of bigotry? I can't quite tell.
Shut the fuck up. Europe isn't even a real continent anyways.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Okay, define three points, and a fourth point not coplanar with the first three. Now, sum up the area of the triangles defined by the fourth point, and subtract the area of the triangle of the first three. You thus define a field that is zero on the triangle of the first three, but nonzero everywhere else. Now, if you substitute a function for the perpendicular position of point four, you can get a field that is zero on a predefined curved plane, bounded by the three-point triangle.
Now, divide any arbitrary surface into such triangles, and multiply the fields together, and you will have a field that is zero on the surface of your object, nonzero everywhere else.
Do this with Parker-sochacki equations, and the solution is computationally simple.
Now, based on this field define a coordinate system whose air velocity is a function of the field value, and zero where the field is zero.
Now, again using Parker-Sochacki, plug that into the Navier Stokes equations, under the effect of a body force that is a miniscule fraction of the difference in velocity from your desired free-stream velocity.
The result will be a mclauren (taylor) series that gives the velocity of the air at any point and time. Since the existance and uniqueness of the Parker Sochacki is already proven, then the existance/uniqueness of the Navier-Stokes solution is also provable.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
The post states that the paper "is claiming to have found the solution to another Millennium Prize Problems" while the article's title is “Existence of a strong solution of the Navier-Stokes equations". By my interpretation, the paper is claiming to show the existence of strong solutions (that is, solutions satisfying the Navier-Stokes equations in non-Weak Form subjected to some set of boundary data) not a general (or any) solution, in particular. While the proof of existence is the Millennium Prize if the proof includes smoothness (continuity after some degree of differentiation), the fact of whether or not these solutions exist is irrelevant to most (if any) Fluid Mechanics texts and engineers/modelers.
The post also states that the Navier-Stokes is "fundamental [set of] partial differentials equations that describe the flow of incompressible fluids"; this is true if all the physical parameters (density, viscosity, and pressure) are taken as constants such that an equation-of-state and energy equation are not needed. However, if they are not assumed constant, the Navier-Stokes equations also perfectly describe the flow of compressible fluids if equipped with an energy equation, an equation-of-state, and other constitutive relations as needed. The only rub comes in when dealing with a fluid that is either not a contiguous field (such as fluids that break-up when immersed in another or, in some cases, a fluid undergoing phase change) or a fluid that does not obey the Stokes Hypothesis (an extension of the idea of a Newtonian fluid to multiple dimensions) which is used as a constitutive relation for the stress tensor in the Navier-Stokes equations.
Except that even that isn't largely true. Yes, it's true that the US heavily relied on German rocket scientists to build up its space program. What's *not* true is the concept that the Soviets did the same. The US actively sought out and brought to the US almost all high-level German rocket scientists after the war during Operation Paperclip, as well as over 100 V2s. The Soviets got almost nobody of significance (Helmut Gröttrup being the only noteworthy exception), and mainly only got line technicians and captured papers/drawings. What's more, for the most part, they didn't actively involve them in their programs - they interrogated them heavily, and once they were satisfied that they knew everything that they knew, they sent them back. Most were dismissed within a year, and by 1951, there were no longer any Germans at all within Soviet rocketry program (although the remaining ones were held for a few years after that to avoid intelligence transfer).
The real quote should be, "Our German rocket scientists are better than your Soviet scientists whose non-domestic contribution is largely limited to data from old documents and lower-level Germans involved in rocketry."
"'If one must live then one must die.' - oh, the truth must be funnier than this..." -- MammÃt
Prior to WWII the Soviets were second only the the Germans in rocket technology, while Goddard was stuck out in the desert begging rich New Yorkers for drips and drabs of funding.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin