数学中国

 找回密码
 注册
搜索
热搜: 活动 交友 discuz
楼主: yuxin

北大首次回应...

[复制链接]
发表于 2006-12-18 12:48 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

[这个贴子最后由webmaster在 2007/12/07 08:03am 第 1 次编辑]

南方人物周刊》一位国内著名大学数学系教授谈北大数学系在国内一手遮天的内幕
《南方人物周刊》,2006年第21期
他们已经形成了一个利益团体
——对一个著名数学教授的匿名访问

“因为选院士的时候他们可以掌控的,你去看一看,选院士,北大有多少票?现在是——任何人得罪他们,那肯定就当不了院士”

本刊记者 张欢 实习记者 钟良

应本刊的邀请,一位国内名牌大学数学系的著名教授接受了访问,向记者透露了国内高等教育存在的某些“潜规则”。
尽管该教授在国内外享有很高的学术地位,但仍然不敢透露自己的姓名和学校,因为“这里面的内幕是你们不懂的:。
有点白色恐怖的味道
教授:坦白地讲,这样与你对话,会给学校以后的发展带来很大的麻烦。所以最好不要把我的名字说出来。这里有许多老师,一个项目一失去的话,整个系的发展就会受限制。
人物周刊:我知道您对北大数学系有尖锐批评,特别是在他们对国内科研基金的项目控制方面……
教授:不光科研基金了,有些大的项目(记者:比如说?),教育部、科技部啦,973计划(编者注:国家重点基础研究发展规划)啦,还有申报一些教育部的奖,因为评委里面都有北大的,或者他们的朋友,我们会都拿不到了。
他们形成了一个利益团体,因为选院士的时候他们可以掌控的,你去看一看,选院士,北大有多少票?现在是——任何人得罪他们,那肯定就当不了院士。
人物周刊:这个现象您是单指数学系?还是……
教授:别的方向我不了解,数学系我了解一些。我们这么多年观察过来,这个样子下去是没有办法的。我一个海外朋友开玩笑说,我们可以公开讨论任何人,开玩笑都没问题,但你不敢私下讨论北大(数学领域)的院士们,要是他们听到后你就麻烦了。到这个地步,有点白色恐怖的味道了。
人物周刊:有这么霸道吗?
教授:就是这个样子。丘成桐先生之所以恼火,原因就是这个,连丘先生这样的都敢死扛着、死顶着,就别说我们这样的小人物了。要是没有丘先生出来说话,那会是什么样子,你可以想象!
当年有华(罗庚)老在,他可以指明一些方向,带出一些好学生,这么多年了,没有像他这样有威望的人来带着中国的数学往前走,一片混乱!因为他们的数学也不行,但是他们掌控着中国(数学领域)的发展:通过他们控制的奖金和基金,可以调节你的数学的发展方向。这二十年中国数学没有大的发展,原因就是这样。
钱是投入越来越多,但是你发现效果反而不如以前。许多人都意识到了这个问题,但你又能怎么办?
人物周刊:您认为北大方面自己也意识到了吗?
教授:我想他们心里也知道。但是一到利益关口,他们就以利益为重。而且他们现在完全掌控着(数学领域)院士的选举,院士选举是重头戏,很多年轻人 为了当院士,就低三下四,可以说是忍气吞声,包括做学问等,完全是人格都变了。
人物周刊:我很难理解。
教授:我就知道一些人为了当选院士,生怕得罪北大,真是低三下四地讨好他们,(记者:比如说?)还是不提他们的名字吧。
人物周刊:他们可以做出什么牺牲来换取一个院士头衔呢?
教授:很多时候要和他们拉关系,要有意去讨好他们,比如说开会邀请他们,还有一些评奖,如果他们也在里面的话,就要有意去照顾北大,或者让给北大。想方设法地让步。说白了,就要低头哈腰,夹着尾巴做人,就是这样。
人物周刊:您谈的是北大数学系的情况,那别的学校呢?
教授:没有实力和它抗衡。(问记者:你是指数学方向吗?)比如说清华的数学系,他们的数学也很强,有很多杰出的青年,但到现在没有一个能当上长江教授的。这说明什么问题?而北大的推一个上一个。
更别说院士了。别的学校想当院士难上加难,除非是复旦的、中科院的。现在中科院也上不去院士了,基本上北大说了算,(记者:为什么?)因为他们自己内部不团结。北大拉了一些中科院的院士和他们合作。你可以看看最近评的一些大奖,评审委员都是些什么人。
人物周刊:都是北大数学系方面的?
教授:对。他们要是给了一个(奖项)给其他学校的,评选院士时(其他学校的)人就要投他们的票。各种奖项啊、评审啊,完全成了一种拉帮结派的工具。坦白地说这批人退休了,你就会发现晴朗很多,发展趋势会好很多。陈(省身)先生离开(去世)前讲的那番话,你就知道他发牢骚的缘故了。
人物周刊:包括陈省身先生这样的,都没有办法吗?
人物周刊:他哪里有办法啊?!他希望他手下那几个年轻人能够当院士,但是就是当不上。人人都知道水平够了,连北大数学系的都知道水平够了,就是当不上。他要是不让你当,你就别想当。这样就形成了了一个利益交织网。
当然他们也不是百分之百都那么差,有时候也有公正的一面,在不损害他们利益时,也有公正的时候。大部分时候我觉得他们做得是很过分的。
应该有媒体监督
人物周刊:总结您的讲话,是不是可以这么说,那些人通过控制奖项,逼得全国高校数学系的老师们全听他们的?
教授:就是围着他们转。
人物周刊:为什么这个评选委员会还能多年维持下去呢?
教授:这么多年来,他们跟方方面面的一些关系都拉好了,评选委员会总是他们的人。而且一些真的很优秀的老先生,比如王元(编者注:著名数学家),年龄大了、退休了,他们对这些事很烦,退了就把空缺给了这些人。
人物周刊:那在您看来,北大数学系对全国其他高校数学系的挤压,在其他高校存在吗?
教授:数学这块,基本上就是北大、中科院和复旦这三派。我想(数学领域的数学家)任何一个想当院士的,一定要投靠这三派之一。现在北大的势力最强,它的院士最多。你要是不投靠这三派,你几乎不可能评上院士。
人物周刊:在您看来,这种院士制度,有必要废除吗?
教授:我想以前周光召(著名物理学家)、丘成桐他们都这么想过,要么降低标准,让很多人都能上院士,把院士的权力和威望降低;另外就是真的把它废除。废除的话,我想现在已经是院士的人不太能同意,相反他们把这个门槛提得更高了,要2/3通过你才能入选(院士)。这样的话北大的更强了。
人物周刊:为什么?
教授:他们本身就占据了2/3的票。
人物周刊:普通民众心中,院士评选本来是非常崇高的啊。
教授:这些院士本身跟太多利益挂钩,一方面,他们(自身)掌控着很多利益,另外他们享受着部级待遇,也很高,这两方面给了他们太多的特权。
人物周刊:什么特权?
教授:要是院士要拿几个项目,那是百分之百地拿。而且每次评审组的组长一定是院士,所以他们的权力非常大。
人物周刊:普通民众怎么也想不到院士里面会有这么多事。
教授:就是这样。要不丘先生这么恼火!周光召是院士,都要求取消院士制度,可见实在是有点过分了!
人物周刊:那在你看来,这种学术界的腐败现象,如果有媒体介入的话,会不会有帮助?
教授:应该有舆论监督。我觉得你要是报道得比较准确,比如像丘先生这样的观点,会产生好的效果。他是一身黑,没办法反驳,不敢公开否认,包括北大数学学院没一个人敢实名站出来,拍着胸脯说:“你说的都是假话。”连一个出来说几句圆场话的都不敢。
但是报道不准确的话,被他们抓住漏洞,反过来会让我们和你们媒体失信。你知道他们心虚,但是另一方面,他就是在等着抓你的漏洞,看到你说的话不准确,或者表达得不是很准确,他就反咬一口,又要搞得天下大乱。
人物周刊:弊病这么多,那么在现有情况下,就没有可能建立一个好的评审制度吗?
教授:现在有一点病入膏肓了,只有等,等到这一批人真的退休。我也希望,丘先生的话能够刺醒某些人。我想一些中央领导人都开始重视了,往往会有好的现象出现,至少可以让以前为所欲为的那些人收敛一些。
人物周刊:在目前的教育体制不能根本改变的情况下,那您觉得我们的高等教育该怎么办呢?
教授:慢慢改善吧?总体来讲,中央领导还是很尊敬这些真正有水平的专家学者的。他们的意见要是能够被参考、受到重视,就像温家宝总理对丘先生的批评意见亲笔批示那样,让他们能真正参与国内一些教育政策制订,情况会慢慢改善的。
发表于 2006-12-18 12:49 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

数学之王——丘成桐作者:丹尼斯·奥弗比(Dennis Overbye)
纽约时报 2006年10月17日
1979年,当时在普林斯顿高等研究所任职的数学家丘成桐访问中国,并提请当时的政府官员允许他去探望一下他的出生地汕头——坐落在广东省的一个山区城镇。

开始他们拒绝了这个请求,说这个城镇没标在地图上。后来又经过了不少周折,终于有人驾车带着丘博士驶上一条新造好的泥路,穿越农田,来到了他的家乡。当地的人宰了一头牛庆祝他的衣锦还乡。在丘博士离开后很久他才知道,原来这条路是专门为了他这次来访而新造的。
“我当时实在很惊讶,”丘博士最近说起这事,笑容里显得有些腼腆。“对这事我感到有点过意不去。”说这话的时候他正站在他晨兴数学中心的办公室里,玻璃灯里射出淡淡的光,照在他身上。晨兴数学中心是他在中国建立的三个数学机构之一。
一年里有九个月,丘博士都在哈佛大学担任数学教授。他最著名的成就是创造了被称为卡拉比-丘空间的数学结构。这一结构奠定了被称为“万有理论”——弦理论的基础。1982年,他获得了素有“诺贝尔数学奖”之称的菲尔兹奖。丘博士时而会出现在哈佛广场上的燕京饭店里,时而也可能出现在数学图书馆边上他那狭小的办公室里,而办公室的黑板上可能满是方程式和精巧切分的圆环曲面的草图。
但是在一年剩下的三个月里,用他的朋友,哈佛大学物理学家安德鲁·斯特罗明格(Andrew Strominger)的话来说,丘博士就是“中国科学的君王鼻祖”,海外华裔中最著名的人士之一,他每年夏天都会回国来工作、教学、游说、给人启迪,也会象个“军阀”一样跟人争来斗去,可为的都是将中国科学推进到世界水平。
大卫·格罗斯(David Gross)是一位诺贝尔物理学奖获得者,也是一名弦理论学家,他担任圣塔巴巴拉分校的科维理(Kavli)理论物理研究所所长。用他的话来说,丘博士是“一个处于帝王与民主人士之间的转型人物”。
丘博士的故事是一扇窗口,通过它可以看到在中国大地上,五千年的中土文化与后现代科学水乳交融时所产生的勃勃生机。如此交融若得成就,将会重塑世界科学的平衡。
“在中国,他是个电影明星,” 这是陈启宗(Ronni Chan)的评价。陈启宗是香港的一名房地产开发商,也是丘博士的一位老朋友,曾帮助出资创办了晨兴研究所。去年夏天,丘博士就“开演”了。他坐着黑色轿车,急匆匆地穿梭于电视演播室与紫禁城内闲人止步的VIP接待室之间。他领着斯蒂芬•霍金(Stephen Hawking)来到天安门广场上的人民大会堂,召开了一次世界弦理论方面顶尖物理学家的大会。在会场上,一位音乐教授还演出了丘博士写的一首诗。其中写道,“美哉美哉,真理之源;时空量化,智者无何。”
丘博士毫不认同所谓的“帝王”之说。他最近驳斥说,他并无政治头衔,而他新近两个最有才气的学生还正处于失业中,这样怎能说他有自己的王朝?他说,“在我看来,这只是某些人的妄断而已。”
当然,他的生活也并不总是一帆风顺。仅在去年,他就因指责北京大学腐败而卷入了与北大的一场公开论战。而《纽约人》杂志上有一篇文章,说他试图在解决一个关于空间结构的世纪难题——庞加莱猜想的成果中沽名钓誉。
人人都认同丘博士是当代伟大的数学家之一。
加利福尼亚大学洛杉机分校的数学家罗伯特•格林(Robert Greene)说,“丘的确是个天才!他所做的数学工作,论质论量都是惊人的。”
但是即使是他的崇拜者也说他有搞政治的一面。迪恩•杨(Deane Yang)是布鲁克林理工大学的一名教授,也是丘家的一位老朋友。他在给《纽约人》的一封信中提道,“继陈省身教授之后丘成为了中国数学之王,他过于自负,也有很大野心,还做了一些让同行感到失望的事情。”但是杨博士也说,“无论在数学上还是在中国,丘博士一直都是一股积极的力量。他是名出类拔萃的教师,培养了39个博士生。”
丘博士的朋友、哥伦比亚大学数学家理查德•汉密尔顿(Richard Hamilton)说,“丘博士建立的,是人才的聚合,而非普通人构成的王朝。人们之所以被他吸引而至,是因为他充沛的精力,他绝妙的想法,以及他对一流数学工作孜孜不倦的支持。丘将这些人组织到一起,共同攻克最困难的问题。”
赤脚男孩
丘成桐出生于1949年。他的超凡潜力并不是一开始就显而易见的。在他还很小的时候,他的家庭在共产党接管政权后离开了大陆。他的父母分别是大学教授和图书管理员,家里总共有八个子女。他自小家境贫寒,在香港郊外的一个没有电也没有自来水的小村庄里长大。他那时是个街头孩子王,还时常逃学。但与他父亲的谈话使他对文学及哲学产生了浓厚的兴趣。在他开始学习数学的时候,他还发现与父亲的谈话更使他体会到了抽象思维为何物。
在2003年的一次谈话中,他说,“事实上,我觉得我在学习了几何以后更深刻地理解了我父亲所说的话。”
在他14岁的时候,他的父亲去世了,由此家境陷入赤贫,还背负了债务。为了缓解悲伤,少年时的丘先生便一头遁入了学业之中。为了维持家里的生计,他当起了家教。
在香港中文大学,丘先生以一名早慧的数学家的形象崭露头角。他仅学了三年,尚未拿到学位便去了加利福尼亚大学伯克利分校的研究生院。
在那里的第一个学期,丘先生选了六门课,忙得连午饭都几乎没时间吃。第一学年还没结束,他就和一位老师合作,一起证明了关于某些特殊弯曲空间中的猜想。他同时也成了当时被公认为当世最伟大的华人数学家陈省身博士的门生。陈博士告诉丘先生说,“他的工作已经足够写博士论文了。”
丘博士在伯克利时正值反战运动如火如荼的时期。他虽未涉足反战运动,但是也已开始涉足政治。他和他的朋友在旧金山的台湾总领事馆前游行,抗议日本对中国领土的侵略。丘博士说,“可能是因为我们羡慕我们的美国同事,所以才效仿他们。”
1972年在22岁时,刚获得博士学位不久的丘博士来到普林斯顿高等研究所,接着又来到纽约州立大学石溪分校及斯坦福大学。1973年他来到斯坦福时正好赶上一场关于几何及广义相对论(爱因斯坦将万有引力归结为扭曲时空的几何)的大会。在这次大会上,丘博士突发奇想,他觉得他可以反证宾夕法尼亚大学教授欧根尼奥‧卡拉比(Eugenio Calabi)很多年前提出的一个猜想。这个猜想认为,多维空间可以像地毯的小毛圈一样卷曲起来。
丘博士于是开始撰写论文。但是两个月后,他收到了一封卡拉比博士的来信,从中他意识到他的推导中存在一个漏洞。丘博士后来回忆说,“我当时失眠了。”
经过两个星期的痛苦挣扎,他最终认为相反的结论才对,即卡拉比猜想是正确的。他对这个猜想的证明在1976年公布后使他成了明星。
他的这一论文也为十年后的弦理论奠定了部分基础,阐明了“万有理论”所要求的十维时空大部分都能卷曲起来,从而消失于现在被称为卡拉比-丘空间的视野之外。
三年后,丘博士又证明了另外一个关于爱因斯坦广义相对论的重要结果:爱因斯坦方程的任何解都必须具有正能量。否则,便如哈佛大学物理学家斯特罗明格所说的,时空将会不稳定——“你会看到永恒的运动。”
由此丘博士便开始了他的跨学科的生涯。作为一名纯粹数学家,他在创立研究曲线和曲面的微分几何方面,用纽约州立石溪大学迈克尔·安德森(Michael Anderson)的话来说,是“一个重要人物,很可能也是最重要的人物。”
哥伦比亚数学家汉密尔顿博士说,“丘博士喜欢成为中心人物,而不像其他人那样喜欢躲在僻静的角落思考。似乎向他袭来的信息越多他就越有成就。”
丘博士同时也是一名荣誉物理学家。用曾在哈佛大学跟随丘博士从事博士后研究的哥伦比亚大学弦理论学家布莱恩·格林(Brian Greene)的话来说,丘博士会用他“大刀阔斧的风格”击溃方程式,揪出其中的物理信息。格林博士说,“他解方程就好像狮子追捕猎物,然后他会把所有的出口都堵死。”
在成功解决卡拉比猜想后,丘博士的道路上充满了奖励与荣誉,包括菲尔兹奖,1985年的麦克阿瑟“天才”奖以及1997年的国家科学奖。他在1990年加入美国籍。(他说他把麦克阿瑟奖的奖金存了起来供他的两个孩子上大学用。)

游子归国
1976年,丘博士和一名来自台湾的应用物理学家郭友云女士结婚。他的家人比他先搬到了圣地亚哥。丘的研究所同事德梅特里奥斯·克里斯托多罗( Demetrios Christodoulou)发现,有一个时期,丘博士每晚深夜都会对着电话唱中文歌。
克里斯托多罗博士在一封电子邮件中回忆说,“丘身上总有新鲜事。我当时心想,他现在想做伟大的歌剧演唱家了。后来我才知道,他是在为他的孩子唱摇篮曲。”
很自然,随着丘博士名声鹊起,他的祖国想让他回归。当丘博士在1979年第一次回中国时,他成了几位归国英雄之一。与西方长达一个世纪不愉快的经历使中国深深地感到在科技上低人一等。
丘博士致力于发展中国的科学,推进基础研究。他安排中国学生来美国,捐款捐书,并游说有钱的好友出资在香港、北京及杭州建立了数学研究所。他甚至在上世纪九十年代的早期住在台湾,好让他的孩子学习中文。
在他的旅行中,他与当时的共产党领导人江泽民成了好友。江给他的印象是“很精干”。而双方都对彼此有这样的认识。在一次招待科学家的晚宴上,江先生背了一首中国古诗的第一句,丘博士随即背出了整首诗,由此显露了他的学识。
2004年,丘博士因其对中国数学的贡献而在人民大会堂受到嘉奖。在一次演讲中提到他获菲尔兹奖的时候,他说:“我没有持有任何国家的护照,因此当然应被视为是中国人。”
就在那年,陈博士逝世了,享年93岁。斯特罗明格博士回忆说,当时有份报纸的标题上说,随着陈的逝世,“丘时代”即将开始。
这并不是个风平浪静的时代。
去年,丘博士一直在和北大针锋相对,指责其造假,用海外名人来虚饰门面,只需他们工作几个月便付给高额的薪水。
《科学》杂志上有调查显示,在中国,这样的兼职教授在过去六年间由6人增加到了89人,而专职教授从66人增加到了101人。这样的作法使得中国的大学也能因为这些人在其他地方的荣誉成就而沾点光。丘博士说,这样会耗尽本来应用来支持年轻研究人员的资源,
今年夏天,北大将一些专职的海外学者重新定为兼职学者。可这一切也是有代价的。前文所述的地产开发商陈先生说“并不是所有人都喜欢丘。他为此付出了代价。”
丘博士也同意这一点。他说,“我说话直来直去,确实会得罪人。”他补充说,他的作风就是,对他学生和同事的观点都要持有挑剔的态度。
丘博士说,在中国,矛盾会引起最高层的注意,因为所有的钱都来自政府。 他说,“我之所以有勇气反对是因为我是位哈佛大学的教授。我不从中国拿一分钱。”
他又说,“如果我没获得菲尔兹奖的话,我可能就被这些人打垮了。”

混乱的证明
丘博士如此热衷于帮助中国,却可能适得其反,这点在庞加莱猜想的证明上就似乎体现出来了。
这个猜想最初是由亨利·庞加莱(Henri Poincare)于1905年提出的。它可能是数学上最著名的问题,并且在一定程度上奠定了拓扑学(一门研究形状的科学)的基础。它的大意是说,任何没有空洞的物体等价于球面。
1982年,哥伦比亚大学的汉密尔顿博士发明了一个被称为里奇流(Ricci flow)的方法来研究空间形状。丘博士非常振奋,觉得这一方法可能最终可以攻克庞加莱猜想。他便开始与汉密尔顿博士一起研究,并号召其他人也来研究这个问题,但是收效甚微。
接着在2003年,一名俄罗斯数学家格里戈里·佩雷尔曼(Grigory Perelman)粗略地勾画出了一个方法,突破了一个一直困扰着汉密尔顿博士的障碍,并为证明这个神圣的定理以及另外一个由康奈尔大学数学家威廉·瑟斯顿(William Thurston)提出的更一般性的定理奠定了基础。佩雷尔曼博士随即消失,剩下他的同事来串起这些零碎的要点。
在丘博士的敦促下,他以前的学生、里海大学(Lehigh University)的曹怀东和中山大学的朱熹平也加入进来接受了这一挑战。去年六月,丘博士宣布说他们已获成功,首个完整的证明将在由他担任主编的《亚洲数学期刊》上发表。
后来在该月召开的弦理论大会上的一次讲话中,丘博士说,“在佩雷尔曼的工作中,许多关键的证明要点都很草略,或者只有一个大纲,而很多证明的细节经常缺失。”他补充说曹、朱的论文用新的论证填补了其中的一些空白。
这个宣布使得很多数学家不满,他们认为丘博士冷落了佩雷尔曼博士。另外有一些小组也即将完成他们自己基于佩雷尔曼要点的证明工作。他们说并没有在佩雷尔曼博士的工作中发现什么漏洞。哥伦比亚大学的约翰·摩根(John Morgan)与普林斯顿的田刚也在合作证明这个定理。摩根说,“他们并没有突然解决什么难点。”
在八月份马德里召开的国际数学家大会上,佩雷尔曼博士被授予菲尔兹奖,但是他拒绝接受这一奖项。一星期后,在《纽约人》上登出了一幅漫画,画的是丘博士试图将菲尔兹奖牌从佩雷尔曼博士的脖子上摘下来。
在他的网站(doctoryau.com)上,丘博士登出了一封12页的信,陈述了他与他的律师认为《纽约人》文章中的错误之处。而《纽约人》说它支持这篇报道。丘博士说,“我在中国的名誉受到了损害,为了帮助年轻的学生,我必须挽回我在中国的声誉。”
他否认曾经说过佩雷尔曼博士的工作中有漏洞。他说,“我说的是他的工作不是所有人都能看懂,就是因为这样才又多花了三年时间。”丘博士说,作为一名“几何学的领军人物”,他有责任要挖掘出这个证明的事实。
汉密尔顿博士说,“任何长期的原创工作,要搞清楚究竟是怎么回事都是很困难的。”他说,丘博士想让对深奥难懂的里奇流有所涉猎的人核实一下这个证明是很自然的事。
在被问及如此张扬地宣传曹、朱论文是否是一个错误时,丘博士回答说,对于证明庞加莱猜想这样伟大的成就,即使是只做出微小的贡献也会被载入科学史册。
此外,他说他也想鼓励一下被中国体制忽视了的朱博士。丘博士承认说,他也觉得有责任应帮助解释汉密尔顿博士的工作。
令人意想不到的是,曹、朱的论文被发现存在一个疏漏。这两位作者用来补充佩雷尔曼博士的证明被发现与耶鲁大学的布鲁斯·克莱纳(Bruce Kleiner)和密歇根大学的约翰·洛特(John Lott)于2003年在网上发表的证明相同。克莱纳和洛特一直在努力阐明佩雷尔曼博士的工作。
在《亚洲数学期刊》登载的一份勘误当中,曹博士和朱博士承认了这一错误。他们说忘记了曾在三年前研究过这些材料并将其纳入了他们的笔记中。
在一封电子邮件中,丘博士说这一事件很“不幸”,但是重申了他决定尽快出版这篇论文。他说,“即使在对此错误进行更正后,这篇论文仍然就汉密尔顿及佩雷尔曼对庞加莱和瑟斯顿猜想的证明提出了很多新的细节以及解释。”
目睹庞加莱猜想的成功证明沦为名利争斗,许多数学家都感到失望。汉密尔顿博士说,“尽管充满竞争,我们仍然还是很依赖彼此的工作的。我们谁都不是在真空中搞研究。”
关于庞加莱猜想的证明,他说,“我从来没见丘说过这猜想不是佩雷尔曼证明的。”他补充说,没有人比丘博士在创立里奇流理论上的功劳更大,这也促成了佩雷尔曼博士的获奖,摩根博士说他仍然把丘博士视为他的朋友。他说,“他为数学做出了极其杰出的贡献。他是个伟大的人物。他的莎士比亚作风比生命还要彰显。他的优点和缺点都比生命还要彰显。”
丘博士说,庞加莱猜想比任何奖项都重要,也超越了政治。
“我研究数学是因为它本身的美,” 他说。“历史将会评价这项工作,而不是某个委员会。”

作者简介
丹尼斯·奥弗拜(Dennis Overbye)毕业于麻省理工学院物理学系,是美国知名的科普作家。著有《宇宙的寂寞心灵》、《恋爱中的爱因斯坦》等书,目前担任《纽约时报》科学版副主编,《时代》、《纽约时报杂志》科学作家。他的第一本书《宇宙的寂寞心灵》曾入围“美国国家书评人奖”和“《洛杉矶时报》科学图书奖”,并获得“美国物理科学学会作品奖”。
发表于 2006-12-18 12:50 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

丘成桐8月末给《亚洲数学月刊》编委的信下面这份电子邮件曾出现在哥伦比亚大学数学系Peter Woit的著名博客“Not Even Wrong”之上。这是8月25日丘成桐写给纽约大学教授Jalal Shatah的答复,并同时转给《亚洲数学月刊》的全体编委,以及Shatah教授的原信。两封通信因何而起没有明确阐明,但是看起来是因为密执安大学的两位教授Kleiner与Lott指控曹怀东和朱熹平非正当地沿袭了他们注释中的内容;由于事态严重,丘成桐把这封给Shatah教授的答复也同时转发给其他所有的《亚洲数学月刊》编委。无论如何,因为该邮件的原始收信人有三十一位数学家之多,它大概已经在数学圈子里广为传播。最近纽约时报的文章“The Emperor of Math”(http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/science/17yau.html?ref=science)提到了曹朱要发道歉声明,则为这件事情的走向提供了旁证:
“In an erratum to run in The Asian Journal of Mathematics, Dr. Cao and Dr. Zhu acknowledge the mistake, saying they had forgotten that they studied and incorporated that material into their notes three years ago.
在《亚洲数学周刊》将要推出的修正上,曹怀东和朱熹平博士会承认错误,说他们忘记了他们研究过(Kleiner和Lott的文章)并把人家内容加在自己三年前的笔记里了。 ”
————————————————————
丘成桐8月末给《亚洲数学月刊》编委的信 译文:
亲爱的Jalal,
如你所见,这答复比Kleiner给编委们的信详实得多。。。。。。无论如何,我会要求更多的解释。我要说,那份论文的这一部分,是在佩雷尔曼的论文刚一出现多数专家读到就理解了的。(大多数人没有做Kleiner和Lott那样了不起的工作,他们还在完全理解证明之前就将非正式的研讨放在网上)。另一方面,多数专家在做出评论之前先等等看自己是否理解整个证明。混乱得多的部分是最后一块,Kleiner和Lott在他们早先的注记里根本没有。
我相信我们都同意佩雷尔曼伟大,应得菲尔兹奖。(这点我在中国的新闻媒体上公开的说了很多次,却不幸被一位美国人扭曲了,而她根据的是闲言碎语和差劲的翻译,那可能是一位想贬损我的诚信的中国数学家做的。)[注一]
正如曹朱论文的前言里讲的很清楚的,他们论文的目的就是要理清汉密尔顿和佩雷尔曼所做的,并根据这两位伟大数学家[注二]的光辉思想把一个证明放在一起。他们当然没有要求严肃的功劳,没有证明的原创思想。[注三] 这对这个问题来说尤其如此。这个指控对任何一位出于解释的目的提供服务的数学家都太过分了。
我注意到有时候即使大数学家们也会忘记提及别人的重要贡献,那是当他们在为别人的工作做解释性的讲说。我想编委们不应该不细查就太激动了。
丘[注五]
————————————————————————
亲爱的丘教授:
谢谢把那封电子邮件转给我。我对于必须找到作者[注四]这一点完全同意。
我当然希望听曹怀东和朱熹平更多的解释。与Bruce与John的注记一样,他们的文章是对>数学界非常重要的贡献。若曹朱的贡献因为没有给他人的工作以正当承认而蒙羞,那将是>遗憾。
最亲密的,
Jalal


注一:丘成桐教授何时何处“在中国的新闻媒体上公开的说过很多次”佩雷尔曼应得菲尔兹奖?诚信待考。

注二:指汉密尔顿-佩雷尔曼。
注三:对曹朱论文的这个评价似乎与丘教授在中文媒体的讲话精神有很大差别。
注四:指曹怀东-朱熹平。
注五:丘成桐教授的英文原信有少量拼写和语法错误,但意思清楚无误。
————————————————————————————
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 09:47:55 -0400
To: (编者按:邮件隐藏)
Subject: [Fwd: Fwd: your paper (Reply to Lott)]

Begin forwarded message:
dear Jalal , As you can see, the reply was much more substantial than Kleiner sent to the editors. . In any case, I will ask for more explanations. I should say that this is a part of the paper that was understood by most experts when they read Perelman\';s paper when it just appeared. ( most people did not do the excellent service as what Kleiner and lott have done by putting informal discussions in the web before they understand the full proof completely. On the other hand, many experts were waiting to see whether they can understand the full proof before they make comments) The much more muddy part was in the last part, which certainly Kleiner and lott did not cover at all in their earlier notes. I believe we all agree that Perelman is great and deserved Fields medal, ( I said it publicly in the news media in china many times and was unfortunately distorted by some american based on gossips and poor translations perhaps by a chinese mathematician who may want to discredit my integrity ) As was stated very clearly in the preface of Cao-Zhu , the purpose of the paper is to clarify what Hamilton and Perelman did and put together a proof based the brilliant ideas of these two great mathematicians . They certainly do not claim any serious credits on original ideas for the main proof, This is esepecially true for this point in question.The accusation is frankly too serious on any mathematician giving a service for expository purpose. I notice that sometimes, even great mathematicians may forget to mention some other people \';s important contributions when they are making an expository talks on other people\';s works. I do not think editors should be too excited at this point without looking into more details

yau
————————————————————————
On Aug 24, 2006, at 11:39 AM, Jalal Shatah wrote:
Dear Professor Yau
Thanks for forwarding this email to me. I totally agree with you about the need to hear from the authors. I definitely would like to hear some more explanation from Cao and Zhu. Their paper is a very important contributions to the math community as are the notes of contributions by not giving proper credit to other works.
Best
Jalal
发表于 2006-12-18 12:51 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

丘成桐-数学的无冕之王Scientist at Work: Shing-Tung Yau The Emperor of Math E-Mail Print Reprints Save By DENNIS OVERBYE Published: October 17, 2006 In 1979, Shing-Tung Yau, then a mathematician at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, was visiting China and asked the authorities for permission to visit his birthplace, Shantou, a mountain town in Guangdong Province. Skip to next paragraph Enlarge This Image Rick Friedman for The New York Times The much-honored mathematician Shing-Tung Yau. Related Hawking Takes Beijing; Now, Will Science Follow? (June 20, 2006) Scientist at Work | Xu Liangying: Einstein’s Man in Beijing: A Rebel With a Cause (August 22, 2006) Elusive Proof, Elusive Prover: A New Mathematical Mystery (August 15, 2006) Prestigious Award, ‘Nobel?of Mathematics, Fails to Lure Reclusive Russian Problem Solver (August 23, 2006) Manifold Destiny (The New Yorker) Enlarge This Image Erik Jacobs for The New York Times The mathematician Shing-Tung Yau at home in Lexington, Mass. Enlarge This Image Dr. Yau, second from left, with the theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking in August 2002 during a satellite conference for the Congress of Mathematics at Zhejiang University in Hangzhou, Zhejiang. Enlarge This Image After growing up in a poor village, Dr. Yau went on to graduate school in Berkeley, Calif. Dr. Yau as a boy, top, and with his family in 1958, above. At first they refused, saying the town was not on the map. Finally, after more delays and excuses, Dr. Yau found himself being driven on a fresh dirt road through farm fields to his hometown, where the citizens slaughtered a cow to celebrate his homecoming. Only long after he left did Dr. Yau learn that the road had been built for his visit. “I was truly amazed,?Dr. Yau said recently, smiling sheepishly. “I feel guilty that this happened.?He was standing in the airy frosted-glass light of his office in the Morningside Center of Mathematics, one of three math institutes he has founded in China. For nine months of the year, Dr. Yau is a Harvard math professor, best known for inventing the mathematical structures known as Calabi-Yau spaces that underlie string theory, the supposed “theory of everything.?In 1982 he won a Fields Medal, the mathematics equivalent of a Nobel Prize. Dr. Yau can be found holding court in the Yenching restaurant in Harvard Square or off the math library in his cramped office, where the blackboard is covered with equations and sketches of artfully chopped-up doughnuts. But the other three months he is what his friend Andrew Strominger, a Harvard physicist, called “the emperor ascendant of Chinese science,?one of the most prominent of the “overseas Chinese?who return home every summer to work, teach, lobby, inspire and feud like warlords in an effort to advance world-class science in China. David J. Gross, the Nobel physicist and string theorist who directs the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara, called Dr. Yau “a transitional figure, between emperor and democrat.?/P> Dr. Yau’s story is a window into the dynamics that prevail in China as 5,000 years of Middle Kingdom tradition tries to mix with postmodern science, a blending that, if it takes, could eventually reshape the balance of science and technology in the world. 丘成桐-数学的无冕之王(2)“In China he is a movie star,?said Ronnie Chan, a Hong Kong real estate developer and an old friend who helped bankroll the Morningside Center. And last summer Dr. Yau played the part, dashing in black cars from television studios to V.I.P. receptions in forbidden gardens in the Forbidden City. He ushered Stephen Hawking into the Great Hall of the People in Tiananmen Square to kick off a meeting of some of the world’s leading physicists on string theory, and beamed as a poem he had written was performed by a music professor on the conference stage. It reads in part: “Beautiful indeed/is the source of truth./To measure the changes of time and space/the smartest are nothing.?/P> Dr. Yau does not buy the emperor bit. Where, he protested recently, is his empire if he holds no political position and two of his most brilliant recent students are currently without jobs? “It’s just a perception as far as I can tell,?he said. Certainly, his life is not all roses. In the last year alone Dr. Yau has been engaged in a very public fight with Beijing University, having accused it of corruption, and a New Yorker magazine article portrayed him as trying to horn in on credit for solving the Poincar?conjecture, a famous 100-year-old problem about the structure of space. Everybody agrees that Dr. Yau is one of the great mathematicians of the age. “Yau really is a genius,?said Robert Greene, a mathematician at the University of California, Los Angeles. “The quantity and quality of the math he has done is overpowering.?/P> But even his admirers say he has a political side. “As Shiing-Shen Chern’s successor as emperor of Chinese mathematics,?Deane Yang, a professor of mathematics at Polytechnic University in Brooklyn and an old family friend, wrote in a letter to The New Yorker, “Yau has an outsized ego and great ambition, and has done things that dismay his peers.?But, Dr. Yang said, Dr. Yau has been a major force for good in mathematics and in China, a prodigious teacher who has trained 39 Ph.D.’s. Richard Hamilton, a friend of Dr. Yau and a mathematician at Columbia, said Dr. Yau had built “an assembly of talent, not an empire of people, people attracted by his energy, his brilliant ideas and his unflagging support for first-rate mathematics, people whom Yau has brought together to work on the hardest problems.?/P> A Barefoot Boy That Shing-Tung Yau, born in 1949, had such potential was not always obvious. His family fled the mainland and the Communist takeover when he was a baby. As one of eight children of a college professor and a librarian, growing up poor without electricity or running water in a village outside Hong Kong, he was the leader of a street gang and often skipped school. But talks with his father instilled in him a love of literature and philosophy and, he learned when he started studying math, a taste for abstract thinking. “In fact, I felt I can understand my father’s conversations better after I learned geometry,?he said at a talk in 2003. When he was 14, his father died, leaving the family destitute and in debt. To assuage his pain, the young Mr. Yau retreated into his studies. To help out financially, he worked as a tutor. At the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Mr. Yau emerged as a precocious mathematician, leaving after only three years, with no degree, for graduate school at the University of California, Berkeley. Mr. Yau took six courses his first semester there, leaving scant time for lunch. By the end of his first year he had collaborated with a teacher to prove conjectures about the geometry of unusually warped spaces. He also came under the wing of Dr. Chern, then widely recognized as the greatest living Chinese-born mathematician, who told Mr. Yau he had already done enough work to write a doctoral thesis. Dr. Yau was in Berkeley during the wildest years of the antiwar movement. He did not participate, but he was already political. He and his friends demonstrated at the Taiwan Consulate General in San Francisco to protest Japanese incursions on Chinese territory. “Maybe we envied our American colleagues and took after them,?Dr. Yau said. In 1971, at age 22, Dr. Yau took his new Ph.D. to the Institute for Advanced Study, then to the State University of New York at Stony Brook and Stanford, where he arrived in 1973 in time for a conference on geometry and general relativity ?Einstein’s theory that ascribes gravity to warped space-time geometry. At the conference, Dr. Yau had a brainstorm, realizing he could disprove a longstanding conjecture by the University of Pennsylvania professor Eugenio Calabi that the dimensions of space could be curled up like the loops in a carpet. Dr. Yau set to work on a paper. But two months later he got a letter from Dr. Calabi and realized there was a gap in his reasoning. “I couldn’t sleep,?Dr. Yau recalled. After agonizing for two weeks, he concluded that the opposite was true: the Calabi conjecture was right. His proof of that, published in 1976, made him a star. His paper would also lay part of the foundation 10 years later for string theory, showing how most of the 10 dimensions of space-time required by the “theory of everything?could be rolled up out of sight in what are now called Calabi-Yau spaces. Three years later, Dr. Yau proved another important result about Einstein’s theory of general relativity: any solution to Einstein’s equations must have positive energy. Otherwise, said Dr. Strominger, the Harvard physicist, space-time would be unstable ?“you could have perpetual motion.?/P> The result is that Dr. Yau has lived a crossover life. As a pure mathematician, he is “a major figure, perhaps the major figure,?as Michael Anderson of SUNY Stony Brook called him, in building up differential geometry, the study of curves and surfaces. Dr. Hamilton, the Columbia mathematician, said Dr. Yau liked to be in the center of things, unlike others who liked to retreat into a corner and think. “He seems to thrive on being bombarded with all this information,?he said. He is also an honorary physicist, using “his muscular style,?in the words of Brian Greene, a Columbia string theorist who worked with Dr. Yau as a postdoctoral researcher at Harvard, to smash equations and get the physics out of them. “He corners equations like a lion after its prey,?Dr. Greene said, “then he seals all the exits.? Prizes and honors flowed Dr. Yau’s way after the Calabi triumph, including the Fields Medal, a MacArthur “genius?grant in 1985 and a National Medal of Science in 1997. He became a United States citizen in 1990. (He said he put away the money from the MacArthur grant for his two children’s college education.) A Wandering Son Returns Dr. Yau married Yu Yun, an applied physicist from Taiwan, in 1976. At one point, when his family had preceded him on a move to San Diego, an institute colleague, Demetrios Christodoulou, noticed that Dr. Yau would pick up the phone late every night and start singing into it in Chinese. “Yau is full of surprises, I thought to myself, now he wants to become a great opera singer,?Dr. Christodoulou recalled in an e-mail message. “As I later found out, these songs were lullabies for his children.? It was natural that as Dr. Yau’s star rose, his “mother country,?as he put it, sought to pull him into its orbit. When he made his first trip back to China, in 1979, Dr. Yau became one of several returning heroes. A century of unhappy encounters with the West had left China with a deep sense of scientific and technological inferiority. Dr. Yau has devoted himself to building up Chinese mathematics and promoting basic research, arranging for Chinese students to come to the United States, donating money and books, and tapping rich friends to found mathematics institutes in Hong Kong, Beijing and Hangzhou. He even lived in Taiwan in the early 1990’s so his children would learn Chinese. In his travels he became friendly with President Jiang Zemin, then the leader of the Communist Party, who impressed him as “a smart guy.?The impression was mutual. When Mr. Jiang recited the first line of a Chinese poem at a dinner honoring intellectuals, Dr. Yau showed off his learning by reciting back the entire poem. In 2004, Dr. Yau was honored at the Great Hall of the People for his contributions to Chinese mathematics. In a speech he said that when he won the Fields Medal, “I held no passport of any country and should certainly be considered Chinese.?/P> That same year Dr. Chern died at 93. Dr. Strominger recalled a newspaper headline declaring that with Chern’s death, “the era of Yau?was about to begin. It has not been a peaceful era. For the last year Dr. Yau has carried on a campaign against Beijing University, accusing it of committing fraud by padding its faculty with big names from overseas and paying them lucrative salaries for a few months of work. A survey in Science magazine showed that the number of such part-time professors in China had grown to 89 from 6 over the last six years, while the number of full-time professors had risen to 101 from 66. The arrangement allows Chinese universities to piggyback on the glory of work these people do in their other jobs. Dr. Yau said it also drains resources that should go to young researchers. This summer, Beijing University redesignated some overseas scholars to part time from full time. All this has taken a toll. “Yau is not universally loved,? said Mr. Chan, the real estate developer. “He has paid a price.?/P> Dr. Yau agreed. “I am completely outspoken. And I do offend people,?he said, adding that his style was to be intensely critical, both of his students and of his colleagues?ideas. Confrontations in China go all the way to the top, because all the money comes from the government, Dr. Yau said. “The only reason I have the nerve to resist,?he said, “is I’m a Harvard professor. I don’t draw a penny from China.?/P> “If I didn’t have the Fields Medal,?he added, “I would be dead to them.? A Messy Proof Dr. Yau’s eagerness to help China can backfire, and that seems to have happened in the case of the Poincar?conjecture. The conjecture, first set forth by Henri Poincar?in 1905, may be the most famous problem in mathematics and forms part of the foundation for topology, which deals with shapes. It says essentially that anything without holes is equivalent to a sphere. In 1982, Dr. Hamilton of Columbia devised a method, known as the Ricci flow, to investigate the shapes of spaces. Dr. Yau was enthusiastic that this method might finally crack the Poincar?conjecture. He began working with Dr. Hamilton and urging others to work on it, with little success. Then, in 2003, a Russian mathematician, Grigory Perelman, sketched a way to jump a roadblock that had stymied Dr. Hamilton and to prove the hallowed theorem as well as a more general one proposed by the Cornell mathematician William Thurston. Dr. Perelman promptly disappeared, leaving his colleagues to connect the dots. Among those who took up that challenge, at the urging of Dr. Yau, were Huai-Dong Cao of Lehigh University, a former student, and Xi-Ping Zhu of Zhongshan University. Last June, Dr. Yau announced that they had succeeded and that the first complete proof would appear in The Asian Journal of Mathematics, at which he is the chief editor. In a speech later that month during the string theory conference, Dr. Yau said, “In Perelman’s work, many key ideas of the proofs are sketched or outlined, but complete details of the proofs are often missing,?adding that the Cao-Zhu paper had filled some of these in with new arguments. This annoyed many mathematicians, who felt that Dr. Yau had slighted Dr. Perelman. Other teams who were finishing their own connect-the-dots proofs said they had found no gaps in Dr. Perelman’s work. “There was no mystery they suddenly resolved,?said John Morgan of Columbia, who was working with Gang Tian of Princeton on a proof. In August, Dr. Perelman was awarded the Fields Medal at a meeting of the International Mathematical Union in Madrid, but he declined to accept it. A week later a drawing in The New Yorker showed Dr. Yau trying to grab the Fields Medal from the neck of Dr. Perelman. On his Web site, doctoryau.com, Dr. Yau has posted a 12-page letter showing what he and his lawyer say are errors in the article. The New Yorker has said it stands by its reporting. “My name is damaged in China,?Dr. Yau said. “I have to fix my reputation in China in order to help younger students.?/P> He denied that he had ever said there were gaps in Dr. Perelman’s work. “I said it is not understood by all people,?he said. “That is why it takes three more years.?As a “leading geometer,?Dr. Yau said he had a duty to dig out the truth of the proof. Dr. Hamilton said, “In any long new work, it’s hard to figure out what’s going on.?It was natural, he said, that Dr. Yau would want people who had experience in the esoteric field of Ricci flow to check the proof. Asked if promoting the Cao-Zhu paper so loudly had been a mistake, Dr. Yau said that even a small contribution to such a great achievement as proving the Poincar?conjecture would live in the history of science. In addition, he said he wanted to encourage Dr. Zhu, who he said had been neglected by the Chinese establishment. Dr. Yau acknowledged that he also felt a duty to help explain Dr. Hamilton’s work. In a twist, a flaw has been discovered in the Cao-Zhu paper. One of the arguments that the authors used to fill in Dr. Perelman’s proof is identical to one posted on the Internet in June 2003 by Bruce Kleiner, of Yale, and John Lott, of the University of Michigan, who had been trying to explicate Dr. Perelman’s work. In an erratum to run in The Asian Journal of Mathematics, Dr. Cao and Dr. Zhu acknowledge the mistake, saying they had forgotten that they studied and incorporated that material into their notes three years ago. In an e-mail message, Dr. Yau said the incident was “unfortunate?but reaffirmed his decision to expedite the paper’s publication. “Even after the correction, the paper provides many important new details and clarifications of Hamilton and Perelman’s proof of the Poincar?and Thurston conjectures.?/P> Many mathematicians are dismayed that the Poincar?triumph has become mired in a fight about credit and personalities. “In spite of the rivalries,?Dr. Hamilton said, “we are deeply dependent on each other’s work. None of us is working in a vacuum.?/P> About the Poincar?proof, he said, “I’ve never seen Yau say that Perelman hadn’t done it.?No one, he added, had been more responsible than Dr. Yau for creating the Ricci flow program that won Dr. Perelman his prize. Dr. Morgan said he still regarded Dr. Yau as his friend. “He has done tremendous things for math,?he said. “He’s a great figure. He’s Shakespearean, larger than life. His virtues are larger than life, and his vices are larger than life.? Dr. Yau said the Poincar?conjecture was bigger than any prize and beyond politics. “I work on mathematics because of its great beauty,?he said. “History will judge this work, not a committee.?/
发表于 2006-12-18 12:51 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

英美同行声援丘成桐 称其从未在中国领薪水英美同行声援丘成桐 称其从未在中国领薪水
2006年10月16日 东方早报
  继美国数学家汉密尔顿发信公开否定《纽约客》对丘成桐的质疑后,日前又有两位国际上的大数学家对丘成桐表示声援。
  哈佛大学数学系教授威尔弗雷德·施密德(WilfriedSchmid)在信中提到,《流形的命运》文中暗示丘成桐是一位逍遥的科学家,不能或者不愿将精力放在哈佛的职位上。
  而事实上,丘成桐在哈佛数学系承担着超出比例的指导博士生任务。他在学校假期、学术休假和偶尔的无薪假期访问中国,“从未在中国的研究机构领取薪水”。
  曾经与丘成桐一起在斯坦福大学任教的剑桥大学数学系Sadleirian讲座教授约翰·科茨(JohnCoates)在信中说:“我亲眼目睹丘到来后,是如何改变了斯坦福大学数学系里年轻数学家中的学术氛围,其中也包括像我一样工作在不同领域的数学家们。他对数学的热情以及杰出的才能立即吸引了不少优秀的研究生,并鼓舞了大家。最严重的一点,《纽约客》的文章完全否认了丘对中国数学界所做出的巨大贡献———我坚信,他对中国数学领域最大的贡献莫过于成功地培养了新一代中国微分几何的学者,他们如今已走在这个相当重要领域的前沿,同时与物理学和宇宙论紧密相关。我个人认为,在所有健在的数学家中,没有一个人可以说自己的贡献比得上丘的这些旨在促进整个数学界利益的众多成就中的哪怕一小部分。很遗憾,《纽约客》杂志的这篇文章并未提及这些卓著的贡献。相反,它在无聊的闲话和无关的传言上却浪费了大量的时间。”
  中国科学院院士丁夏畦也在公开信中表示,《纽约客》发表这样的质疑文章,却未采访“庞加莱猜想”中的重要专家———理查德·汉密尔顿及葛哈德·惠斯根(GerhardHuisken)是荒谬的.
发表于 2007-12-6 20:48 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

我想信丘成桐没有说假话
发表于 2007-12-8 16:41 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

回应了.......真棒
发表于 2007-12-8 16:42 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

支持楼主的帖子
发表于 2007-12-19 15:07 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

是真是假的官司可交国际法庭判
发表于 2008-1-10 12:38 | 显示全部楼层

北大首次回应...

丘成桐说北大清华的坏话已经不知是多少次了
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|数学中国 ( 京ICP备05040119号 )

GMT+8, 2025-6-19 12:35 , Processed in 0.093283 second(s), 14 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

Copyright © 2001-2020, Tencent Cloud.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表