Genius of the Rules-Style System

Edward Witten said that Wiles received the Wolfskehl Award.

Wiles won many mathematics and science awards for his proof of Fermat's conjecture, but the one that is directly related to Fermat's conjecture and is very meaningful is the 'Wolfskehl Prize', even "Fields" "Special Contribution Award", as well as the famous "Wolf Award", are to be placed behind the "Wolfskehl Award".

The origin of the ‘Wolfskehl Award’ is a very legendary story.

A hundred years ago, Wolfskehl, a mathematics enthusiast and businessman from country D, fell in love with a beautiful girl. Unfortunately, he was directly rejected by the beautiful girl, which made him hit hard and extremely sad. He even decided to To commit suicide.

However, although Wolfskehl had strong feelings, he was not reckless in doing things. He worked out every detail of his death plan very carefully. Finally, he determined the date of suicide and decided to commit suicide at the stroke of midnight. At that moment, shoot yourself in the head.

In the remaining days of his life, Wolfskehl still worked very hard and properly handled all his business affairs. On the day he planned to commit suicide, he first wrote a will and then wrote farewell letters to all his relatives and friends. .

Wolfskehl was relatively efficient and quickly handled all the planned matters, but there were still several hours before midnight.

In order to kill the last time of his life, Wolfskehl went to the library. He casually opened a mathematical journal, and soon he was attracted by one of the articles.

This article is Kummer's explanation of why Cauchy and Lame's method of proving Fermat's Last Theorem does not work. It is a great mathematical paper, probably suitable for suicidal mathematicians to read at the last moment.

Wolfskehl was unknowingly attracted by this classic paper. He carried out detailed calculations and verifications, and was surprised that there seemed to be a logical loophole in the original argument:——

Kummer makes an assumption without justifying it in his argument.

Wolfskehl wasn't sure whether he had discovered a serious flaw in logic or whether Kummer's assumptions were reasonable.

If it is the former, then the proof of Fermat's last theorem may be easier than many people guess.

So Wolfskehl carefully reviewed the weak proof, gradually concentrating on this small proof that would either strengthen Kummer's work or prove that his hypothesis was wrong.

In the latter case, all of Kummer's work would be declared invalid.

At dawn, Wolfskehl finally completed the proof, remedying Kummer's proof and thus confirming that Cauchy and Lame had failed to prove Fermat's Last Theorem.

At this time, the scheduled time for suicide had long passed. Wolfskehl was extremely proud that he had discovered and corrected a flaw in the great Kummer's work, because the entire proof process made him fully feel the joy and joy of success. The charm of mathematics has re-realized the value of life.

Mathematics aroused Wolfskehl's desire to start life again.

Wolfskehl tore up all the farewell letters he had written and made a new will: after his death, when the will was read, Wolfskell's family were shocked to discover that much of his estate had been donated Create a prize to be awarded to the first person to prove Fermat's last theorem.

The prize money is preserved and awarded by the Royal Scientific Society of Göttingen, the interest of which can be used for the development of mathematics.

This is the origin of the Wolfskehl Award.

The "Wolfskehl Prize" is unique and will only be awarded to the prover of Fermat's conjecture. The prize is 100,000 marks, which is about one million pounds today.

The Science Association of Country D has kept the "Wolfskehl Prize" prize money for more than 80 years, and it was finally awarded to Andrew Wiles, who proved Fermat's conjecture.

More than ten years later, Zhao Yi proved Wiles's logic error and now provides a proof of Fermat's conjecture.

This sounds interesting.

When Edward Witten mentioned the "Wolfskehl Award", everyone around him couldn't help laughing.

It was definitely well-intentioned, I just thought it was interesting, and it didn't mean any 'sarcasm'.

In any case, facing the new proof of Fermat's conjecture, the scientific association of country D will definitely be embarrassed, but they have no choice. There is only one "Wolfskehl Prize", and they cannot conjure a second one. At best, Wiles won't be recognized for winning the award, but the bonus will definitely not be returned.

Scientists will not be held responsible for erroneous research, nor will any bonuses received be returned.

In fact, just like when an athlete wins an Olympic championship, even if the medal is withdrawn later, the bonus will definitely not be refunded. Some athletes spend the bonus directly after receiving it. Wanting them to return it involves a series of complexities. Problem, many people will be implicated as a result, it is simply unnecessary and impossible to do.

This is especially true in the scientific community.

If a scientific research is proven wrong, we cannot say that the scientist is a 'liar', because research is about exploring things outside the boundaries of human knowledge. It is very normal for mistakes to occur. Winning awards for wrong research does not bear any responsibility. responsibility, and bonuses are never refundable.

"So the people of country D are destined to suffer the consequences of being dumb."

"But I sympathize more with Wolfskehl. If he knows that the wealth he has accumulated, the prize he established will eventually be awarded to a logically incorrect proof. When the correct proof is provided, the prize money is gone..."

Edward Witten shook his head as he spoke.

Others also followed implicitly, and the topic was dropped. One was that a respectable mathematician from a hundred years ago was involved, and they continued to say that something was not good. The other was that a reporter came over.

It's okay to say these things in private, but it wouldn't be good if they were reported.

There were several reporters who came. Because the report meeting was over and time had almost passed, the person in charge of the venue arranged for reporters to conduct interviews freely.

Zhao Yi simply sat in the first row of seats.

Edward Witten and Qiu Chengwen were standing nearby. They gave up their positions to Zhao Yi. They just stood by and watched with a smile, not trying to steal the limelight.

They also have their own interviews.

Both of them are Fields winners, and reporters are also very interested in them. Of course, the 'interest' is still related to Zhao Yi. The reporters want to know the evaluation of the two Fields winners on Zhao Yi's certification.

The proof is not yet confirmed to be correct, so the comments from the mathematicians are naturally very important.

Edward Witten said, "I believe there is no more elegant and rigorous proof than this. He established a new method that became the link between number theory and topology. Using this method, he proved Fermat's conjecture." "

"I think this method is more important than the proof of Fermat's conjecture itself!"

"We all know that (Fermat's) conjecture is already a theorem, but nothing has changed. It is the same as it is now and in the future."

"And the method he established, I believe, will be widely used in the field of number theory, and will be of interest to all mathematicians. Perhaps more conjectures and more mathematical problems will be solved as a result."

The Capital TV reporter concluded by asking, "So Mr. Witten, do you think Zhao Yi's proof is correct?"

"Of course, obviously, he proved Fermat's conjecture."

Edward Witten said with certainty.

Qiu Chengwen's interview captured the key. He only focused on "proving the conclusion" and said, "You can celebrate in advance. The report is perfect and the process is perfect."

"From today on, we can say that Fermat's conjecture has been proved, and it was proved by Zhao Yi."

"Of course, the international (review) has not reached a conclusion yet, but I believe it is only a matter of time."

The review conclusions of foreign institutions are indeed very important.

There is no 'official' review of academic achievements. All reviews are unofficial, academic, and private in nature. The difference lies in world influence.

Institutions with great influence in mathematics include the Newton Institute, the Clay Institute, etc., as well as the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, or other universities, scientific research institutions, and organizations.

For every new mathematical result, influential institutions weigh in.

The importance of influence is that academic achievements recognized by the above institutions will be recognized by most magazines, journals, universities, etc. in the world, and spread to every corner of the world.

This is how a study is recognized.

More than ten years ago, Wiles's proof of Fermat's conjecture was initially recognized by the Newton Institute, so it was accepted for submission by mathematics journals. Subsequently, various award selection committees and media from various countries gradually recognized the results.

Now Zhao Yi's Fermat conjecture proves the same. If you want to gain recognition from the world, you still need to be recognized by influential institutions. Unfortunately, there are no academic institutions in China that have influence all over the world.

When Edward Witten and Qiu Chengwen were being interviewed, Zhao Yi was also being interviewed. Facing several cameras, he acted calmly and expressed confidence in his proof results, "I am very sure, it is 100% correct. "

After talking about some things about the results, the reporter asked about the 'gossip' topic -

Andrew Wiles.

Zhao Yi, Wiles and Fermat's conjectures have all been compiled into "must-tell" stories on the Internet.

This topic is very gossipy.

The reporter wanted to know what Zhao Yi would say about Wiles. People around him thought that Zhao Yi would not talk much about this topic because it was a bit sensitive. Unexpectedly, Zhao Yi did not care and said seriously, "I'm doing it." Before studying Fermat’s conjecture, I carefully read Mr. Wiles’s proofs and arguments, more than 100 pages of them.”

"It is true that there were errors in Mr. Wiles's paper, but it is definitely not without merit. We cannot completely deny a study simply based on the results."

"Mr. Wiles's argument covers almost all the content in the field of mathematics. Just looking at the paper itself, one can easily conclude that his mathematical level is the best in the world. I use the word 'the best' to describe it. , no exaggeration at all.”

"I have great respect for Mr. Wiles, he is an extremely good mathematician."

"In addition, I can clearly say that part of my proof process drew on Mr. Wiles's ideas. If I had not studied his paper, perhaps I would not have completed the proof of Fermat's conjecture until now. "

"So, I want to say that although his proof was wrong, he should not be slandered or slandered because of it..."