Slashdot Mirror
Famed Mathematician Claims Proof of 160-Year-Old Riemann Hypothesis (soylentnews.org)
Slashdot reader OneHundredAndTen writes: Sir Michael Atiyah claims to have proved the Riemann hypothesis. This is not some internet crank, but one the towering figures of mathematics in the second half of the 20th century. The thing is, he's almost 90 years old. According to New Scientist, Atiyah is set to present his "simple proof" of the Riemann hypothesis on Monday at the Heidelberg Laureate Forum in Germany. Atiyah has received two awards often referred to as the Nobel prizes of mathematics, the Fields medal and the Abel Prize; he also served as president of the London Mathematical Society, the Royal Society and the Royal Society of Edinburgh.
"[T]he hypothesis is intimately connected to the distribution of prime numbers, those indivisible by any whole number other than themselves and one," reports New Scientist. "If the hypothesis is proven to be correct, mathematicians would be armed with a map to the location of all such prime numbers, a breakthrough with far-reaching repercussions in the field."
"[T]he hypothesis is intimately connected to the distribution of prime numbers, those indivisible by any whole number other than themselves and one," reports New Scientist. "If the hypothesis is proven to be correct, mathematicians would be armed with a map to the location of all such prime numbers, a breakthrough with far-reaching repercussions in the field."
To predict the prime numbers, you need *many* nontrivial zeroes of the Riemann zeta function calculated with high accuracy. How many are we talking about I have no real idea, but the one million zeroes published by Andrew Odlyzko aren't sufficient very far.
If an ancient, famed mathematician talks about a "simple" proof, it usually means the paper is only the size of a phone book instead of a whole library.
They use words differently than you or me would. It's like when astronomers talk about "nearby objects".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Or when Astronomers say "soon" and actually mean 1 million years.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Calling a proof "simple" is not an insult to a mathematician: it is a compliment.
You think he is denigrating his work while he is really bragging in a way that is so over your head that you think it is beneath you.
Ask me how I know you aren't a mathematician.
EC is not post-quantum, and the problem of solving Elliptic Equations can be turned into a factoring problem
The results of the Riemann hypothesis are already Conjectures in number theory - The Theorem being True or False is a Binary condition ---- So if the Riemann theorem being true had ANY breakthrough affect at all, then people trying to crack codes could already have TRIED the assumption that the hypothesis was true (or at least good enough) to test their cracking procedures that would only work if the supposed Hypothesis to be true.
Knowing the Truth or Falseness of 1 bit (The Riemann Hypothesis) doesn't suddenly make cracking easier --- If the value of the Truth was 1, then tests carried out depending on methods developed from the RH would already have been shown to be useful.