On the other side of the ocean, it is already late at night or even early morning in most places.

But the discussion triggered by today's sudden update is still continuing.

Well, it can no longer be said to be a discussion. It can be said that the academic world has begun to have an earthquake.

Researchers engaged in mathematics may not subscribe to other journals, but it is impossible not to subscribe to the four top journals. Naturally, they are also very clear about the publication rules of the four top journals.

This kind of bimonthly magazine is almost never published in the first three days of the month, which seems a bit impatient.

Of course, this also made many people pay attention to the papers in this year's issue for the first time.

Especially among a group of scholars who study algebraic geometry and number theory, the impact of Qiao Yu's cover paper can even be said to be at the level of a nuclear explosion.

The reason is that the generalized modal axiom system proposed by Qiao Yu is actually a programmatic mathematical idea, and it is a highly creative and cutting-edge mathematical idea.

But at the same time, unlike the Langlands Program, Qiao Yu did not propose a series of conjectures, but directly set out to prove these propositions, reflecting very direct operational thinking.

Qiao Yu not only provides a theoretical framework, but also actively works to prove relevant propositions.

Similar to a path that combines theoretical research and verification, the process from concept proposal to theoremization is seamlessly connected.

To be honest, expanding the boundaries of classical mathematical thinking through a new axiomatic system is what every mathematician hopes to do.

For example, when talking about calculus, people will think of Newton and Leibniz, whose status in the world of mathematics is undoubtedly unquestionable.

In the same way, if Qiao Yu can improve his system of generalized modal axioms, this research method will probably become a required course for future mathematics students, just like calculus.

The reason is simply that these two words are easy to use.

Regardless of its abstractness, if Qiao Yu can enrich this axiom system, it will undoubtedly make many currently difficult problems simpler.

The key to this is the expansion of the tool library.

Many people don’t quite understand the meaning of tools in mathematical operations. In fact, to put it bluntly, they are theorems constructed by mathematicians using rigorous logic in papers.

For example, calculus, Fourier transform, Laplace transform, complex function, calculus of variations, sieve method, group theory, differential geometry, symplectic geometry, Markov chain, etc...

The current development of mathematics is that these mathematical tools can only play a role in specific fields.

However, mathematicians believe that these branches of mathematics are deeply connected. As for how this connection is reflected, no one has discovered yet.

Then there is algebraic geometry, which is nothing more than connecting algebraic equations with geometric curves.

In mathematical physics, symplectic geometry is used to study Hamiltonian dynamics, and its structure is also derived from mathematical symmetries and geometric transformations.

Even the subsequent Langlands Program, the most essential purpose of this program is to unify algebra, number theory and representation theory, and to establish cross-field connections by establishing a deeper mathematical tool framework.

The most successful part is that it provides a macro perspective that allows mathematicians to analyze the common laws behind these mathematical tools.

This has also led many people to believe and make judgments that the perspectives of different mathematical tools may be abstracted into a broader axiom system in the future.

To put it bluntly, Qiao Yu is currently doing such work, which can be regarded as a new attempt to unify mathematical logic tools.

Of course, one attempt may not cause any waves. Mathematicians have tried many things, but only a handful can really make an impact.

But there are no secrets in the mathematics community. The luxurious reviewer lineup of these two papers has long been spread.

After all, for these big guys, reviewing such a mathematical paper, which they collectively believe is logically rigorous, is not something that needs to be kept secret.

People who don’t want to be exposed are often the kind of papers that know clearly that this article is just a piece of shit, but because of the relationship, people come to ask for it, and they have to pinch their noses and pass the paper.

So the comment Dugan Lott helped Pierre Delini make up also spread.

"This will be the greatest milestone of this century, probably none of them!"

After the paper was published, a friend even sent a private message to Pierre Delini asking whether this comment was true, and Pierre Delini admitted it without hesitation.

He even said that Andrew Wiles thought he was right...

Yes, Pierre Delini now feels that Lot Dugan is his perfect mouthpiece.

Well, if it weren't for the paper that Qiao Yu gave a report at the Chinese Mathematical Society today, he might have used a joking tone to push Lott Dugan out.

But that's not necessary now.

Although Qiao Yu just gave a report at the Mathematical Society early this morning, Pierre Delini had actually read this paper on the prime number problem a few days ago.

It is still being studied even today.

After Tao Xuanzhi accepted the invitation of the Chinese Mathematical Society to jointly review this paper, he also had some in-depth discussions with Pierre Delini.

The two concluded that it was a very bold attempt to transform the distribution of prime numbers into a modal problem on a geometric path.

What the two admired most was that Qiao Yu’s paper drew on the idea of ​​the prime number theorem when constructing the modal density function.

This shows that Qiao Yu's generalized modal axiom framework has provided a brand-new tool for solving conjectures in classical number theory.

Yes, not possible, but already!

When the two people came up with this argument, Tao Xuanzhi directly posted this opinion on his personal blog.

Compared with those big celebrities, Tao Xuanzhi's blog may not have many fans.

But his fans are very pure. Whether it is the courses at UCLA, the open classes in MasterClass, or his status as the youngest Fields Medal winner, he has many fans in the mathematics community.

Moreover, his personal blog often comments on the papers of some well-known mathematicians, and the comments are very detailed.

Just like Zhang Yuantang's paper, he once commented on it on his personal blog, and even found many errors in it.

This once again promoted the spread of Qiao Yu's paper.

So as the day passed, Qiao Yu's paper began to spread widely in the Western mathematics community.

For Qiao Yu, what he gave at the Mathematical Society was just an abstract and preliminary manuscript submitted, because mathematics is not the same as calculation after all.

So Tian Yanzhen’s opinion is that he should submit the report directly to the journal, and even directly make a deal with Lot Dugan using this paper.

Of course, it was precisely because this paper had been presented at the conference that Qiao Yu not only directly entered the backend system after the report, but also directly posted it to the pre-publication website arXiv.

With Tao Xuanzhi's promotion on his personal blog, Qiao Yu's paper on bounded intervals between prime numbers immediately hit a peak in downloads.

Especially for mathematicians who study prime numbers, this is definitely the most exciting breakthrough in recent years.

Now that Qiao Yu can make the bounded interval between prime numbers reach 6, it means that it is not far away from completely solving this problem. Maybe they can even use the set of tools given by Qiao Yu to solve the twin prime conjecture, Bodoni

Asian conjecture, even Riemann conjecture...

In mathematics, there are generally two types of mathematicians who are most likely to be remembered by history. The first type is the founder, or the founder of a mathematical direction.

For example, Gauss pioneered number theory, algebra, and probability theory; Euler introduced analytic number theory, graph theory, and the Euler formula; Poincaré introduced topology and dynamic systems, and Goldbach's conjecture inspired the study of integer theory...

The second type is the coffin lid for a type of problem.

The most typical example is Andrew Wiles. Because he solved Fermat's conjecture that he didn't write down because there were not enough positions, even though he was over forty years old, the Mathematical Union specially got him a Fields Silver.

Quality Medal, and currently the only Fields Silver Medal in the world...

There is no doubt that even if someone solves the Riemann Hypothesis at the age of sixty, he will probably win this honor, turning the only Fields Silver Medal into two!

But to be honest, for mathematicians who have reached a certain age, they rarely have such unrealistic ideas to challenge those big propositions.

For example, the six millennium questions... Because everyone knows that if you challenge those questions rashly, there is a high probability that you will get nothing for the rest of your life.

If you spread the word and still get laughed at, you are overestimating your capabilities.

In fact, as mathematics has developed to this era where this branch is extremely detailed, there are many unsolved small problems. They prefer to focus on relatively more specific and controllable problems.

For example, Boolean mean, perfect matching, Hamiltonian path, equidistant set...

Really, as long as we don’t set our sights so big, the mathematics community can still accommodate many people to solve small problems. Such work is also extremely valuable and can even promote the development of some applied technologies.

But things are different now. The three papers made many people suddenly have some different ideas.

If you just look at Qiao Yu's first two papers, it is obvious that they focus on the general mathematical language problem of mathematical unification. It can only be said that the guy who tried to build this basic mathematical framework is indeed a genius, and he dares to think and do it!

But the third article directly reduced the interval from 246 to 6, which shocked many people as you can imagine.

If you can quickly master this new mathematical method and then solve one or two important problems in number theory, you can make a lot of money.

Even if he only proves the twin prime conjecture, as long as his age is not exceeded, he will most likely be awarded a Fields Medal.

If some more advanced number theory problems...

Some people even think that if Qiao Yu's system is successfully constructed, it may be able to solve problems such as the Riemann Hypothesis, the N-S equation, and even N=NP?.

Therefore, it is conceivable that the enthusiasm among the world’s academic circles is rising, and the impact is felt in all aspects!

…

Across the ocean, Berkeley.

As soon as Frank arrived at the office, he received a call from Lucas Eisen.

After a few simple greetings, Lucas Eisen got to the point directly.

"You should still remember Qiao Yu, right?"

"Of course, I think I will never forget him in this life. After all, he made me experience the biggest setback in my life, well, at least so far."

Although Professor Frank didn't think so in his heart, or he remembered Qiao Yu not just for this reason.

But obviously this excuse is almost airtight, and it fits the self-deprecating sense of humor of the Federation people.

Yes, more than ten years of living in the Federation has allowed him to integrate into this cultural system.
To be continued...