Talk:Shing-Tung Yau

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Hong Kong Portal This article is part of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project!
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale.
Hong Kong To-do: edit purge Project Maintenance Participate in the reformation discussion of the assessment criteria. Recruit editors

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

	Physics Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.
Help with this template Comments: edit – history – watch – refresh I found the last sentence of this bio -- Yau gave a controversial lecture on the proof of the Poincaré conjecture which may have influenced Grigory Perelman's decision to decline the Field's Medal -- troublesome. Is there any evidence backing this statement. An encyclopedia should provide facts rather than conjectures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.204.28.144 (talk • contribs) 2006-08-24T14:09:07. The article could use additional references, per WP:BLP. It could also use a more thorough list of important works. The biography could be split into sections rather than being one long section. CMummert · talk 14:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics.
Mathematics grading:	B Class	Low Importance	Field: Mathematicians
See comments page
Comments: I found the last sentence of this bio -- Yau gave a controversial lecture on the proof of the Poincaré conjecture which may have influenced Grigory Perelman's decision to decline the Field's Medal -- troublesome. Is there any evidence backing this statement. An encyclopedia should provide facts rather than conjectures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.204.28.144 (talk • contribs) 2006-08-24T14:09:07. The article could use additional references, per WP:BLP. It could also use a more thorough list of important works. The biography could be split into sections rather than being one long section. CMummert · talk 14:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Name 2 New Yorker Article 3 On why Yau's recent attempt to derogate Perelman's should be included in the article 4 Deletion of New Yorker Article

[edit] Name

Why is his name not in hanyu pinyin is he was from mainland china? --Jiang 05:12, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I guess that's becuase cantonese is his mother tongue.--160.39.177.149 02:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but more precisely because he got the anglicization in Hong Kong, where he was raised.

I found the last sentence of this bio -- Yau gave a controversial lecture on the proof of the Poincaré conjecture which may have influenced Grigory Perelman's decision to decline the Field's Medal -- troublesome. Is there any evidence backing this statement.

An encyclopedia should provide facts rather than conjectures.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Shing-Tung_Yau/Comments"

There is evidence for the above statement, see New Yorker article in external links below. 69.128.160.77 12:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Um, yeah. The statement regarding Poincare, Perelman etc. featured a reference to a lengthy, well-researched, published article discussing the matter in detail. How bizarre that someone would delete a well sourced statement, not even bother to check the reference, and then whine about facts and evidence etc. --GaeusOctavius 18:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Yorker Article

Yau is suing the Nasar, Gruber and the fact checker at the New Yorker for defamation. It should have been pretty clear to anybody reading this article that it was highly opinionated and approaching defamation. The fact that it has been used so uncritically in wikipedia is quite disturbing.

Um, actually he hasn't sued them yet, he has demanded a retraction and apology, and he has retained a lawyer. If his allegations prove true it will indeed be disturbing for the New Yorker's reputation, but I don't think you can blame Wikipedia.--GaeusOctavius 00:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it is not fair to place this issue as a highlight on Yau's biography in wikipedia, simply because it is too controversial. An unbiased portrayal is very difficult to place, as one can see in articles such as "Manifold Destiny". It is better to leave the references and delete the content -- frinklemur

[edit] On why Yau's recent attempt to derogate Perelman's should be included in the article

I would like to express my respect to the people who have created the article of Yau, after all he has huge contributions to mathematics. Yet, he is human, and thus suffers all lusty passions that humans might have, including envy, and usurpation of someone's elses right. This happened in extremely high level considering the recent amazing work done by Grigori Perelman on proving the Thurston's geometrization conjecture and thus the Poincaré conjecture. Yau also abused his position as editor in the Asian Journal of Mathematics and this should be also put in his biography. In Wikipedia are reflected all important facts, including biographies of serial killers, and other crimes. Yau's unsuccessful attempt is extremely prominent unethical behavior, which obviously affected Perelman's life, since Perelman is currently unemployed and quited mathematics after this Chinese attempt to derogate his achievement.

See also:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman#Verification
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Grigori_Perelman#On_the_Yau_crew_-__Zhu_and_Cao_completely_derogated_Perelman.27s_proof

I hope wiki-editors will vote for, and include these data in Yau's biography. Regards, Danko Georgiev MD 02:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

p.s. As a reply to the commentaries above my post, which discuss that possibly Yau is not the cause for Perelman's decision, please read the following article which is in Russian. Exactly because of this derogative Chinese attack, look where he lives [at least photos speak of themselves]. It is quite conceivable that if there are only couple of people who can understand his math work, NOBODY can defend him because of proper understanding that Perelman is right, but the opinion should be based on factors that do not take mathematics into account. This is what makes Perelman feel sorrow, and that is why he declined the Fields medal, in an intreview he said that the mathematicians that give him the award are NOT competent to do that, because they do NOT understand his work. http://zhizn.ru/article/society/3659/ Danko Georgiev MD 07:41, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

For those who don't read Russian, the article referenced above by Danko Georgiev MD is a terrible piece of journalism. It portrays Perelman as a paranoid weirdo and contains a lot of factual mistakes. --206.169.169.1 23:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The article is correct on one thing - and this is where Perelman lives, and the photos clearly show how Perelman looks like. The New Yorker article clearly shows that the Perelman's choice to quit mathematics is result from Yau's immoral attempt to steal Perelman's credits Nasar, Sylvia, Gruber, David. "Manifold Destiny: A legendary problem and the battle over who solved it.", The New Yorker, 21 August 2006. So what I have stated is that Perelman suffers because of Yau's immoral action, otherwise Perelman would not quit the Steklov institute. Whether the russian article is bad journalism is not relevant. The russian article however clearly shows in what misery Perelman lives now, because photos are real. Regards, Danko Georgiev MD 08:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of New Yorker Article

I have removed the paragraph on the New Yorker article debate for several reasons.

Firstly, the New Yorker article is not faithfully represented. Nowhere does the article accuse Yau of formally contesting Perelman's priority in the proof of the Poincare conjecture.

The New Yorker article also does not say that Zhu and Cao claimed to be the "first to 'complete' the proof using Hamilton Perelman theory." The article directly cites the paper itself,

By the end of the following week, the title of Zhu and Cao’s paper on the A.J.M.’s Web site had changed, to "A Complete Proof of the Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures: Application of the Hamilton-Perelman Theory of the Ricci Flow. The abstract had also been revised. A new sentence explained, This proof should be considered as the crowning achievement of the Hamilton-Perelman theory of Ricci flow.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/08/28/060828fa_fact2?currentPage=9

Note three things :

a)

No claim is made that Yau authored the paper.

b)

The new yorker article does not accuse yau of making claim to being "the first to complete", rather, simply his students published "a complete proof". Nor is any subsequent retraction alleged. (this weird situation resulted from Perelman's never submitting a polished proof to a journal.)

c)

It says the proof is the crowning achievement OF the Hamilton-Perelman theory. This means the achievment belongs to the Hamilton-Perelman theory, not the authors, which do not, again, include Yau.

That is my first objection to these paragraphs, that the New Yorker Article is incorrectly presented.

Secondly, the New Yorker cannot be considered a reliable source with respect to priority in mathematical research which inevitability requires authority in mathematics itself. Wiki policy is clear on this :

Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy, or are authoritative in relation to the subject at hand.

Nassar is not generally regarded as a reporter at all, but rather a biographer. At least two of the sources she quotes have publically stated she has misquoted them :

http://www.doctoryau.com/letter_stroock.html

http://www.doctoryau.com/letter_anderson.html

She does not pass the 'trustworthy' test in this instance and is of course not authoritative in relation to this subject.

Wikipedia's policies state that poorly sourced material, when they refer to a living person, must be removed immediately due to their potential for personal harm.

This controversy amounts to so much rumor. This brings me to my third and least important reason. This is a man who is arguably the creator of modern geometrical analysis. His work forms the foundation of String Theory. The importance of these achievements cannot be overstated.

An article by a non-mathematician claiming that - in a paper he did not author - he *intended* to steal credit but changed his mind - is totally out of place when it occupies 30% of an article otherwise devoted to factual, verifiable and accurate portrayals of his work.

Incidentally - as we are not here to decide these matters but rather judge their relevance and reliability - but as an aside, Perelman has refused prizes in the past. Also, the completion of the proof - making it suitable for publication in a journal - was necessitated by Perelman's refusal to submit the paper to any refereed journal, and his refusal to respond to any requests to flesh it out in a form suitable for publication. This highly unusual situation forced other mathematicians to publish "a complete proof."

On a personal note i should add i am in no way an interested party in the 'controversy', just a devoted wikipedian.

Every indication is Perelman simply wants to work alone in peace. He has refused prizes in the past. The Field's was worth $13,000 US. The Millenium Prize of $1M US has yet to be offered. Perelman need make only one phone call and money would be wired to him immediately from any major university in exchange for writing his next theorem on their letterhead.

CeilingCrash 09:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)