tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post115907813409364550..comments2024-08-11T17:06:39.615+08:00Comments on Sun Bin: Quick note: Yau vs New YorkerSun Binhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-64040005664716726292013-11-14T23:45:58.392+08:002013-11-14T23:45:58.392+08:00well, Yau has been a very well known superstar in ...well, Yau has been a very well known superstar in this scene. But sometimes any person can make mistakes, being blinded by myopia. Not many people on earth seem to believe Yau's contribution to the conjecture. Now he would better go back to his beloved mother country, China, as he wishes, rahter than identifying himself a proud American.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1160117436699443602006-10-06T15:50:00.000+09:002006-10-06T15:50:00.000+09:00Beida climbed another spot to No. 14 in The 2006 W...Beida climbed another spot to No. 14 in <BR/>The 2006 World University Rankings, published today in The Times of London, the best outside of US and UK.<BR/><BR/>http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/<BR/>http://www.thes.co.uk/current_edition/story.aspx?story_id=2032893<BR/>http://news.sina.com.cn/c/edu/2006-10-06/005211167496.shtml<BR/><BR/>LWAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1159771786693244662006-10-02T15:49:00.000+09:002006-10-02T15:49:00.000+09:00Hamilton spoke out.Prof. Richard Hamilton, Columbi...Hamilton spoke out.<BR/><BR/>Prof. Richard Hamilton, Columbia Univ., responds to the New Yorker article, September 25, 2006<BR/><BR/>Howard M Cooper<BR/>Todd & Weld LLP<BR/>28 State Street, Boston, MA 02109<BR/>Direct Dial (617) 624-4713 / Fax (617) 227-5777<BR/>hcooper@toddweld.com<BR/><BR/>September 25, 2006<BR/><BR/>Dear Mr. Cooper<BR/><BR/>I am very disturbed by the unfair manner in which Yau Shing-Tung has<BR/>been portrayed in the New Yorker article. I am providing my thoughts below<BR/>to set the record straight. I authorize you to share this letter with the New<BR/>Yorker and the public if that will be helpful to Yau.<BR/><BR/>As soon as my first paper on the Ricci Flow on three dimensional manifolds<BR/>with positive Ricci curvature was complete in the early '80's,Yau immediately<BR/>recognized it's importance;and although I had proved a result on which<BR/>he had been working with minimal surfaces,rather than exhibit any jealosy he<BR/>became my strongest supporter.He pointed out to me way back then that the<BR/>Ricci Flow would form the neck pinch singularities,undoing the connected<BR/>sum decomposition,and that this could lead to a proof of the Poincare conjecture.<BR/>In 1985 he brought me to UC San Diego together with Rick Schoen and<BR/>Gerhard Huisken,and we had a very exciting and productive group in Geometric<BR/>Analysis.Huisken was working on the Mean Curvature Flow for<BR/>hypersurfaces,which closely parallels the Ricci Flow,being the most natural<BR/>flows for intrinsic and extrinsic curvature respectively.Yau repeatedly urged<BR/>us to study the blow-up of singularities in these parabolic equations using<BR/>techniques parallel to those developed for elliptic equations like the minimal<BR/>surface equation,on which Yau and Rick are experts.Without Yau's guidance<BR/>and support at this early stage,there would have been no Ricci Flow program<BR/>for Perelman to finish.<BR/><BR/>Yau also had some outstanding students at San Diego who had come with<BR/>him from Princeton, in particular Cao Huai-Dong,Ben Chow and Shi Wan-<BR/>Xiong. Yau encouraged them to work on the Ricci Flow,and all made very<BR/>important contributions to the field.Cao proved existence for all time for the<BR/>normalized Ricci Flow in the canonical Kaehler case ,and convergence for<BR/>zero or negative Chern class.Cao's results form the basis for Perelman's exciting<BR/>work on the Kaehler Ricci Flow,where he shows for positive Chern class<BR/>that the diameter and scalar curvature are bounded. Ben Chow,in addition to<BR/>excellent work on other flows,extended my work on the Ricci Flow on the<BR/>two dimensional sphere to the case of curvature of varying sign.Shi Wan-<BR/>Xiong pioneered the study of the Ricci Flow on complete noncompact<BR/>manifolds,and in addition to many beautiful arguments he proved the local<BR/>derivative estimates for the Ricci Flow.The blow-up of singularities usually<BR/>produces noncompact solutions,and the proof of convergence to the blow-up<BR/>limit always depends on Shi's derivative estimates; so Shi's work is central to<BR/>all the limit arguments Perelman and I use.<BR/><BR/>In '82 Yau and Peter Li wrote an exceedingly important paper giving a<BR/>pointwise differential inequality for linear heat equations which can be integrated<BR/>along curves to give classic Harnack inequalities. Yau repeatedly urged<BR/>me to study this paper,and based on their approach I was able to prove Harnack<BR/>inequalities for the Ricci Flow and for the Mean Curvature Flow. This<BR/>Harnack inequality,generalized from Li-Yau,forms the basis for the analysis<BR/>of ancient solutions which I started, and which Perelman completed and uses<BR/>as the basic tool in his canonical neighborhood theorem. Cao Huai-Dong<BR/>proved the Harnack estimate for the Ricci Flow in the Kahler case,and Ben<BR/>Chow did the same for the Yamabe Flow and the Gauss Curvature Flow.<BR/><BR/>But there is more to this story. Perelman's most important is his noncollapsing<BR/>result for Ricci Flow,valid in all dimensions,not just three,and thus<BR/>one whose importance for the future extends well beyond the Poincare<BR/>conjecture,where it is the tool for ruling out cigars,the one part of the singularity<BR/>classification I could not do. This result has two proofs,one using an<BR/>entropy for a backward scalar heat equation,and one using a path integral.The<BR/>entropy estimate comes from integrating a Li-Yau type differential Harnack<BR/>inequality for the adjoint heat equation,and the other is the optimal Li-Yau<BR/>path integral for the same Harnack inequality; as Perelman acknowledges in<BR/>7.4 of his first paper,where he writes "an even closer reference is [L-Y],where<BR/>they use "length" associated to a linear parabolic equation,which is pretty<BR/>much the same as in our case".<BR/><BR/>Over the years Yau has consistently supported the Ricci Flow and the<BR/>whole field of Geometric Flows,which has other important successes as<BR/>well,such as the recent proof of the Penrose Conjecture by Huisken and<BR/>Ilmanen,a very important result in General Relativity. I cannot think of any<BR/>other prominent leader who gave nearly support to our field as Yau has.<BR/><BR/>Yau has built is an assembly of talent,not an empire of power,people<BR/>attracted by his energy,his brilliant ideas,and his unflagging support for first<BR/>rate mathematics, people whom Yau has brought together to work on the hardest<BR/>problems.Yau and I have spent innumerable hours over many years working<BR/>together on the Ricci Flow and other problems,often even late at night. He<BR/>has always generously shared his suggestions with me,starting with the observation<BR/>of neck pinches,never asking for credit. In fact just last winter when I<BR/>finally managed to prove a local version of the Harnack inequality for the<BR/>Ricci Flow,a problem we had worked on together for many years,and I said I<BR/>ought to add his name to the paper,he modestly declined.It is unfortunate that<BR/>his character has been so badly misrepresented.He has never to my knowledge<BR/>proposed any percentages of credit,nor that Perelman should share credit for<BR/>the Poincare conjecture with anyone but me; which is reasonable,as indeed no<BR/>one has been more generous in crediting my work than Perelman himself.Far<BR/>from stealing credit for Perelman's accomplishment,he has praised Perelman's<BR/>work and joined me in supporting him for the Fields Medal.And indeed no<BR/>one is more responsible than Yau for creating the program on Ricci Flow<BR/>which Perelman used to win this prize.<BR/><BR/>Sincerely yours,<BR/>Richard S Hamilton<BR/>Professor of Mathematics,<BR/>Columbia University<BR/>Letter on Yau.nb 3 <BR/><BR/>http://doctoryau.com/hamiltonletter.pdfSun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1159183942452916492006-09-25T21:32:00.000+10:002006-09-25T21:32:00.000+10:00Like ESWN, I also have story to tell.... The nice ...Like ESWN, I also have story to tell.... <BR/><BR/>The nice thing is, when I reported my resentment of what happenings to the head of faculty, I was first threatened by the lecturer, then I received a C- for the final report (where I received B and above for the previous papers). The professor was not rehired for the following term. But my C- stayed.<BR/><BR/>This is with a US university.<BR/><BR/>Sometime I wonder if it is worth the effort to be a whistle-blower. There are just too many things would suddenly appear against one.hoonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07420717810111331458noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1159158190091825152006-09-25T14:23:00.000+10:002006-09-25T14:23:00.000+10:00This is my personal opinion on the Yau-New Yorker ...This is my personal opinion on the Yau-New Yorker controversy. <BR/><BR/>I may be wrong but here what I left on the sci-am blog (+ some minor amendment):<BR/><BR/>---<BR/><BR/>Yau is not what Nasar described. I think you are right that the truth is somewhere in the middle. Nasar has attacked Yau's character rather than focused on the Poincare controversy.<BR/><BR/>This is my personal interpretation of the controversies (from someone who has left the field for a few years)<BR/><BR/>1. Yau perhaps exaggerated the Zhu-Cao achievement. But it was mainly for the consumption of Chinese audience. He wanted to boost the morale of the mathematics society in China (and those "whom were marginalized/discriminated by the Peking University clan" -- according to Yau).<BR/>Nasar mis-understood Yau's motivation and thought he wanted to steal Perelman's honor and made a few reporting mistakes.<BR/>The fact that Yau chose to talked about the Cao-Zhu paper in Beijing (instead of Harvard or anywhere outside China) supports the hypothesis that Yau did not want to discredit Perelman.<BR/><BR/>2. Nasar made a few nasty comments on Yau, such as trying to be the sole heir of Chern and the godfather of Chinese mathematics. I think this is simply wrong and irresponsible. Nasar also accused Yau of pushing his student to tackle big problems, I think this is simply laughable, anyone who knows an Ivy League professor or grad student should know that. (see Yau's defense on this, which is solid)<BR/><BR/>3. Yau (and his supporters) seems to think that Nasar was secretly bought by his rival(ex-student) Gang Tian (& team). I guess the situation is probably less sinistic. Nasar probably just wanted to make a story, but she was willing to trade off the accuracies of the facts to make it more dramatic.<BR/><BR/>4. I personally do not think Yau's accusation on Tian was totally fair -- especialy on Tian's receiving double salary in Princeton/MIT and Beijing University. As for Yau's accusation of Tian's plagiarism, Yau seems to have some witness but Tian also got his case so I am not sure who is right, or mayber the truth is, as gthe sci-am blog says, something in the 'middle'<BR/><BR/>Conclusion:<BR/>a) Yau has his faults in exaggerating and biase on his students achievement. But I think it is a much smaller crime than Nasar accused him of. Yau is a character far from what Nasar portrays.<BR/>b) The competition in Math research is intense. Yau is competing on 'fair rule', i.e. like 90% other mathematicians. <BR/>c) Nasar is a lousy reporter, who has somehow lost her objectivity, perhaps too eager to write a dramatic story. (this is very easy to see from her accusation of how Yau led his students)<BR/>But I do not think there is conspiracy between Nasar and Yau's enemy.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1159113896282015142006-09-25T02:04:00.000+10:002006-09-25T02:04:00.000+10:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1159112179403819322006-09-25T01:36:00.000+10:002006-09-25T01:36:00.000+10:00You are right. Yau has asked for apologies and ret...You are right. Yau has asked for apologies and retraction and threatened with law suit.<BR/>I think I said "he took legal action" because he made that request through a lawyer, but I guess that does not count as legal action.<BR/><BR/>If what Yau said is right and that he had communicated with New Yorker multiple times prior to its publication, then the reporters is either 'malicious' or incompetent. Anyway, from what I read the report was quite ignorant about the whole affair regarding Yau (e.g. heir to Chern, pushing grad students for excellence/etc), but very informative on other areas (Perelman/ Hamilton/ Thurston), making one wonders what led her to such conclusion.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1159100572451145732006-09-24T22:22:00.000+10:002006-09-24T22:22:00.000+10:00Sun Bin,
First of all, Yau has not actually...Sun Bin,<br /> First of all, Yau has not actually filed suit against SYLVIA NASAR et. al.<br />Also the New Yorker has said that it stands behind the story and its authors.<br /><a href="http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=158369">see Boston Herald.</a> Given that Yau has antagonized more than his fair share of mathematicians in the US, I don't think he can win a libel suit. The best outcome Yau can expect is some form of New Yorker "correction" buried in small print.<br /><br />For a public figure to win a libel suit against a media publication in the US is extremely difficult.<br />The plaintiff has to convince the jury of all 3 key elements of defamation, falsity and actual malice. Malice is the hardest to prove - if Yau were to sue Nasar and company, he had to show that they libeled him with intention to do injury to him in the first place, rather than mere incompetence or unprofessionalism.<br />See e.g. <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE1DC1131F936A35757C0A961948260">Westmoreland vs CBS</a><br /><br />In spite of this, I hope Yau will file suit against them. There is a lot spin and overt anti-Chinese<br />sentiments in the article in particular and American media in general.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com