Going Beyond Fermat's Last Theorem

amjith writes "An Indian mathematician, Chandrashekhar Khare, is poised to make a significant breakthrough in the field of number theory with his solution of part of a major outstanding problem in algebraic number theory. He is currently an associate professor in Mathematics Department of University of Utah. "

And being Indian ...

[ggvaidya]

is in any way relevant why?

Somebody give that man tenure, quick!

[Dr. Spork]

I have a feeling a lot of excellent math departments will be looking to hire this guy from Utah.

Re:Another one?

[rdwald]

At least this Indian mathematician is still alive. :)

Even better, at least this Indian mathematician has a name [slashdot.org].

Fast Tenure for him

[afstanton]

If htis pans out as well as it looks like it will, this guy will be a full professor in no time flat.

Re:And being Indian ...

[viscount]

It's extra information about the guy that made the breakthrough. It explains why the article that describes the achievement is The Hindu - an Indian newspaper. Obviously you are trying to make a not-so-subtle 'it's racist' comment. Would you have been quite so quick to jump on your high horse if the mathematician was of a different nationality - say American or British?

Re:And being Indian ...

[fatmonkeyboy]

Maybe it's not, but then neither is the fact that he's an associate professor at the Mathematics Department of the University of Utah.

It's pretty common to mention where people are from when giving a news story. It's part of the human interest.

I mean, look at the "Science" page RIGHT NOW:

"First hypothesized to be possible 30 years ago by Russian physicist Victor Veselago, meta-material..."

See? Russian physicist.

Are you trying to imply there's some sort of racial overtone to the article? I don't get it.

Re:And being Indian ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mentioning the institution adds relevant information to the story. This gives the reader a chance to see what other work that particular academic department does, as well as gives people an oppritunity to see this professor's academic history.

If this guy was a professor at the India Institute of Technology, then it would be fine too. If this guy was an Indian at IIT and the headline says "Indian Professor does XYZ", then I would even understand too, but why, as society in America, have to deliniate the work that Americans do and the work that others do? That is racist and demeaning.

Re:And being Indian ...

[jea6]

It was relevant in the context of the original article, published for an Indian audience on hindu.com.

Re:Isnt everybody?

[wfijvvz]

Is that unproffesionalism on his part? Or on the part of the idiotic journalists picking up a story before it was ready? Science works because scientists communicate. "Hey I plan on attacking this problem using this two part method. I'll let you know how it goes!" "Here is what I've done so far. That's part one. It looks like it's going well, but it might not work. I'll let you know how it goes!"

Don't be so PC

[Anonymous Coward]

Being Indian is totally irrelevant to the story

*sigh*

But the story isn't using "Indian" in a racist way. It's merely an addition, perhaps to shed some "interesting" light on his background outside of his area of research. Not everything that mentions somebody's ethnicity is racist.

You sound like one of those overly-PC people who make things difficult for everyone, just for the sake of trying to live up to some misplaced "holier than thou" moral code.

Person1: "See those kids playing? One of them is my niece."
Person2: "Which one?"
Person1: "The black-haired one."
Person2: "There are six of them."
Person1: "The one in the blue shirt."
Person2: "That leaves four..."
Person1: "Ummm, the one with the sandals..."
Person2: "Three..."
Person1: "...and the red ball."
Person1: "Oh, you mean the black girl? Cute kid."

Re:And being Indian ...

[Xoro]

Yes, it's just you.

The phrase you find so objectionable is *the first paragraph* of the the linked article in The Hindu, written by one " T. Jayaraman".

"MUMBAI: An Indian mathematician, Chandrashekhar Khare, is poised to make a significant breakthrough in the field of number theory: with his solution of part of a major outstanding problem in algebraic number theory."

http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/25/stories/20050425 06 530100.htm

One suspects that The Hindu wrote it that way because The Hindu takes a special interest in Indians around the world and their achievements -- does this make them racists?

Only to you.

Hmmm...

[MrByte420]

Waiting on a math major to give a long-winded set of analogies to make this somehow releevant to the masses....

Re:And being Indian ...

[say]

When was the last time Albert Einstein was refered to as "that German professor", or Isaac Newton as "that English scientist"? It's just not relevant.

Uh... every textbook I've ever read refer to them that way, until the author of the textbook assumes that you know them and their history already.

I checked my introduction to philosophy textbook, which almost exclusively refers to philosophers by nationality in the first paragraph they're mentioned.

I think it's just you, yes.

Serre's Conjecture

[ThosLives]

I went hunting to find out what the Conjecture is since it appears to be so important, and stumbled across this [wolfram.com] It appears that this was already proved in 1976 and is now known as the Quillen-Suslin Theorem.

I wonder, is there a second Serre's Conjecture, or do people not do research any more to see if their work has already been done? Every link I can find for Serre's Conjecture or Quillen-Suslin Theorem indicates that it has already been proved (Quillen got the Fields medal in 1978).

Re:Serre Conjecture

[tbjw]

Somebody mod the parent '-1 Misleading'. There are two problems commonly known as the "Serre conjecture", and the parent happens to point to the wrong one. This problem has very little to do with number theory.

It's probably best to refer to the conjecture that is on the verge of being solved as "Serre's reciprocity conjecture".

The other conjecture was solved in 1976, and ought to be called "The Quillen-Suslin Theorem", except that that also could refer to another related but different result.

Re:A story

[spuzzzzzzz]

So is Mexico. Are Mexicans Americans? What about Chileans?