Live data from Hacker News

Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

news.ycombinator.com

221–230 of 439 posts

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#221
post #78

Math used to be a young person game, but it now requires so much knowledge just to get to the frontiers of human knowledge, not to speak of making a dent into uncharted territory, that results are being obtained later and later in life. When mathematicians have had time to accrue sufficient knowledge while still being sharp enough to make the intellectual leap. The sad part is that as the trend continues we may reach…

I haven't spent much time thinking about this but were Einstein's contributions a combination of intellect and "shallow" or relatively quick frontiers. I.e. a very intelligent intellectual working on the problem sets that are approachable without the same level of overhead required these days? I.e. Today's world wouldn't support an individual who could have such an impact on most math/scientific disciplines?

When it comes to physics, I think the issue is more that we are on the limit of what we can reasonably test. It's like trying to figure out how the body works before the invention of the microscope.

Newton's Gravity was known to be incomplete for many years, just by looking at Mercury. It took several carefully derived experiments studying light for 100s of years that led us to Maxwell's equations in the 1860s that became the basis for Einstein's special relativity in the 1910s. You don't need a billion dollar particle accelerator to come up Maxwell's Equations (2 of them were done by Guass in the 1700s!). 20 or 30 years (and talent!) studying calculus or physics could get you something.

Today we know Einstien's theory of gravity is incomplete but the only places it is incomplete is inside of a black hole (good luck running a test in a blackhole) or at very tiny scales where gravity's affect is minimal. Today, I don't know how you would even come up with a competing theory without having millions to spend on a particle accelerator. While einstein famously just did a thought experiment on what should happen if the speed of light is constant for all observers, most "discoveries" are done now by smashing particles in billion dollar tubes.

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#222
post #171
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it now requires so much knowledge just to get to the frontiers of human knowledge, not to speak of making a dent into uncharted territory, that results are being obtained later and later in life. When mathematicians have had time to accrue sufficient knowledge while still being sharp enough to make the intellectual leap. The sad part is that as the trend continues we may reach a point where a mathematician's in…

This sentiment is humorous, as I'm an optimist apparently. More children will learn more quickly. Applying AI to education should supercharge the smartest.

> Applying AI to education should supercharge the smartest.

What does that mean?

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#223
post #78

Math used to be a young person game, but it now requires so much knowledge just to get to the frontiers of human knowledge, not to speak of making a dent into uncharted territory, that results are being obtained later and later in life. When mathematicians have had time to accrue sufficient knowledge while still being sharp enough to make the intellectual leap. The sad part is that as the trend continues we may reach…

I think it will never get to that. As the frontiers expand, new ways of travel to the frontier are opened up, and the old meandering roads that took so long are left to history.

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is probably not the best thread for a political discussion, but I will take a shot. Nobody disputes that governments should be a force for good. Government's obviously can do both good and bad. Many reason atrocities like the cultural revolution came of under the pretext of trying to help. If you think the government has veered into doing bad, it is natural to want to reform it and make it stop doing that. the t…

> the talking point and metaphor simply conveys a belief that some of the governments work is bad and should be stopped This is a nuanced and thoughtful position. The statement "The 9 words you never want to hear are I'm from the government and I'm here to help" " is not nuanced and thoughtful, it doesn't suggest governments do good and bad, it positions governments (and their agents) as incapable of doing good. That…

I don't know what to tell you. It's not a literal statement. At Best it is a heuristic and more often, a platitude.

It's like don't talk to Cops or corporate HR works for the company and not you.

If you were to take it at face value and debate it against it, you would be making the fallacy error of secundum quid. If you want to have a real discussion about how much good and or bad the government does, you need to find a real human to have that discussion with. The saying alone is a not complete self-contained philosophy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secundum_quid#:~:text=Secund...

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck finding a movie about Isaac Newton or Einstein, or literally anyone whose value to the world is more than pretending to be someone else or lying a lot, let alone a very interesting mathematician no one recognizes. (Ok I know there’s a few movies about folks like Turing and Nash, but it’s pretty slim pickings).

This whole theme is sort incompatible with movies. Most people like to relate to the characters in the plot. The "genius guy" does something we can't understand has very little appeal as a story. Same thing goes for mathematics that is too "deep". Most people could not care less about prime numbers. Yes, they drive important cryptographic procedures. But we care about cryptography. We care that the message gets to it…

[deleted]

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#226

As an older person currently working on a PhD, this guy was and is a something of a hero to me. He has an interesting life story. He was very into math at an early age, so he's different from people like me who got interested in it later in life, but he's also different in that his family was sent down to the countryside in China. I remember reading a lot about him a few years ago and relating to some of the professi…

you got to read this article from his sister: https://zhishifenzi-com.translate.goog/depth/character/480.h...

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#227
The “lack of progress” in philosophy comes down to this. By the time of Socrates or Confucius, there had already been a lifetime’s worth of philosophical thought done that you needed to grapple with. Everyone since then has necessarily had to let something slip through in order to move forward at all.

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good luck finding a movie about Isaac Newton or Einstein, or literally anyone whose value to the world is more than pretending to be someone else or lying a lot, let alone a very interesting mathematician no one recognizes. (Ok I know there’s a few movies about folks like Turing and Nash, but it’s pretty slim pickings).

N Is a Number: A Portrait of Paul Erdős is a decent enough documentary about a specific mathematician. Colors of Math breezes across six contemporary mathematicians.

[deleted]

Re: Monumental (if correct) advance in number theory posted to ArXiv by Yitang Zhang

#230
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For some 10 years, I had recommended 100 mainland Chinese students to the department and all accepted by the department. I am always indebt to the trust of my judgements by the department. Only very few of them misbehaved, bit the hands which fed them, none of them intended to murder their parents/friends , almost all of them performed well and became well-liked. No murderers, great success!

It's a reference to Brendt Christensen.

Probably a reference to Yongfei Ci actually (https://dailyillini.com/news-stories/2014/06/20/yongfei-ci-s...)

UIUC is not having a great track record wrt grad student murderers o_O

Post reply on HN