Orange Orange (tag:grigory perelman)

Ran across a New Yorker writeup on the story of how Grigory Perelman proved the Poincaré Conjecture, a math problem that has been unsolved for about a century, and is something like this decade’s Fermat’s Last Theorem. This article was in a book–Best American Science Writing of 2007–that I randomly plucked off the bookshelf of a friend. Naturally, being the Internet addict that I am, the first thing I do after reading the article is look it up online, and lo and behold, it has an entire Wikipedia entry devoted to it. Why? Turns out, the piece attracted quite a bit of controversy for the soap opera-esque tale of cat-fighting mathematicians and intellectual dishonesty it covered. The New Yorker was even at one point threatened with legal action by a Chinese mathematician who claimed to have been defamed in the piece, although that has since blown over.

Academic politics and drama notwithstanding, the upshot is, now we have three incredibly interesting–and impeccably written–pieces on the fascinating field of topology from my favorite news sources: National Public Radio, The New York Times, and the article linked to above (and below) in the New Yorker.

Best part of article is when Perelman explains why he refused the Fields Medal for his discovery, and subsequently withdrew completely from professional mathematics. (the Fields is the mathematical equivalent of the Nobel Prize, and had never been refused since it was first awarded in 1936):

“As long as I was not conspicuous, I had a choice,” Perelman explained. “Either to make some ugly thing”—a fuss about the math community’s lack of integrity—“or, if I didn’t do this kind of thing, to be treated as a pet. Now, when I become a very conspicuous person, I cannot stay a pet and say nothing. That is why I had to quit.”

Russian mathematician Mikhail Gromov then adds:

“To do great work, you have to have a pure mind. You can think only about the mathematics. Everything else is human weakness. Accepting prizes is showing weakness.” Others might view Perelman’s refusal to accept a Fields as arrogant, Gromov said, but his principles are admirable. “The ideal scientist does science and cares about nothing else,” he said. “He wants to live this ideal. Now, I don’t think he really lives on this ideal plane. But he wants to.”

["Manifold Destiny" via The New Yorker]

Another interesting article from the “Best Science Writing” collection (and also in the New Yorker): “The Score” by Atul Gawande, a fascinating history of obstetrics and the techno-ethical conundrum the field finds itself in today, in the age of industrialized childbirth and C-sections.