Atiyah and Singer to Share the 2004 Abel Prize 127
sbar writes "The 2004 Abel prize-winners have been announced.From the website: 'The Atiyah-Singer index theorem is one of the great landmarks of twentieth century mathematics, influencing profoundly many of the most important later developments in topology, differential geometry and quantum field theory. Its authors, both jointly and individually, have been instrumental in repairing a rift between the worlds of pure mathematics and theoretical particle physics, initiating a cross-fertilization which has been one of the most exciting developments of the last decades.'"
Suddenly, (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Suddenly, (Score:5, Funny)
Homer: Say it in English, Doc.
Dr. Hibbert: You're going to need open-heart surgery.
Homer: Spare me your medical mumbo-jumbo.
Dr. Hibbert: We're going to cut you open and tinker with your ticker.
Homer: Could you dumb it down a shade?
It's the use of language (Score:1, Offtopic)
Different professions find that the language is not up to the task of quickly and concisely describing what they do, so they re-use words giving them new meanings, invent new ones and in the process make it difficult for the layman to understand WTF they are talking about. Sometimes deliberately but more often simply due to convenience.
In order to even have a chance of understanding, you'd have to know the meanings of the underlying language, otherwise it's just babble.
It's worth n
Re:Suddenly, (Score:1)
Re:Suddenly, (Score:2)
No doubt. I read that blurb three times, and every time I heard this *WHOOOSH!* sound right above my head. This story gets a "+1 - Inscrutable" rating from me.
Re:Suddenly, (Score:2)
Congratulations, you're much more mathematically talented than average. Most folks reading this theorem see a small speck flying in the stratosphere, then hear a faint *whooosh* several seconds later.
Heck, I took a 400-level topology course way back when, and I still couldn't fully parse the abstract [wolfram.com].Re:Suddenly, (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Suddenly, (Score:3, Funny)
Fantastic news (Score:3, Funny)
The real work has yet to be done.
Re:Fantastic news (Score:1)
Or, they could each share it the first six days equally (1 for 3 days, the other for the other three days). Then, on Sunday, they could give it to ME!
Re:Fantastic news (Score:2)
my contribution (Score:5, Informative)
Atiyah [wikipedia.org] is of The University of Edinburgh and is one of the founders of K-theory, a branch of topology. He won the Fields in 1966 (sic). Singer [wikipedia.org] is of MIT, and is an institute professor [wikipedia.org], which is supposed to be a big deal.
I hope that posterity will judge me kindly, not only as to the things which I have explained, but also to those which I have intentionally omitted so as to leave to others the pleasure of discovery. -Descartes
Interesting quote they left. Perhaps a more classy way of saying that their margin was too small to write another wonderful proof in?
Re:my contribution (Score:4, Informative)
You are welcome to correct me if I'm wrong here...
Re:my contribution (Score:2)
So I guess they're saying that, despite decades-- nay, CENTURIES-- of mathematicians striving to keep their f
Here you go, a layman's explanation. (Score:5, Informative)
The theorem basically states that there is a deep connection between analytic properties of a manifold and the topological invariants of the manifold.
A "manifold" is a mathematical "space". Think of it as a big playdough that you can put things on. You put things call "vector bundles" on them (imagine sticking little arrows on your playdough. For those with some math background, these vector bundles,roughly, are just functions.
Imagine you have two different set of vector bundles on it (i.e. 2 different set of functions)
A "partial differential operator" will eat the function from one set, and spit out a function from the other. An "elliptic PDO" does this uniquely, and can be inverted (i.e. you can eat either set.)
Usually, the geometry of your playdough manifold will determine the number of such PDOs.
Now, there is an "index" associated with the elliptic PDOs. The index is the difference between (roughly) the number of PDOs inside the "kernel" (ok this is too hard to explain what is a kernel) and the number that is NOT in the kernel.
Usually, given a manifold, it is easy to compute the index without knowing the exact details of your vector bundles and manifold etc (it is hard to find the exact number in/outside the kernel).
There is also a thing call "topological invariants" associated with your playdough. A topological invariant is any mathematical quantity that does not change if you mash around the playdough manifold *without making new holes that go through*. For example, the Euler Characteristic is one such number. A rough guide is the number of holes of a pretzel. Pretzels with same number of holes will have the same Euler Char (though they might look very different).
What atiyah and singer found is that there is a deep connection between the Index of the analytic operators on a smooth compact complex manifold without boundary and its topological invariants.
"smooth" means there is no "kink" or rough edges of your playdough (a cube is not smooth, but a sphere is). Compact means it is finite in size. Without boundary means it is not bounded by a border (The surface of a sphere is compact and has no boundary, a piece of paper is compact but is bounded by its edges).
Complex means that the functions that live on the manifold can have complex numbers.
That's all I can figure out. Anybody who knows better should feel free to correct me.
Re:Here you go, a layman's explanation. (Score:2)
*WHOOOSH!*
There it goes again. What IS that thing?
Re:Here you go, a layman's explanation. (Score:3, Insightful)
And that's probably even more true of PlanetMath [planetmath.org].
Theoretically, it's possible to weed through the hierarchy of definitions in either resource and figure out what was meant. Practically, you usually have to have advanced training in the subject to be able to put it all together.
But, really, you can't blame either s
Re:Here you go, a layman's explanation. (Score:5, Informative)
Now in group theory you're looking at very simple algebraic structures, such as: 1. how the integers act under addition, 2. how the positive real numbers act under multiplication, 3. how a book could be put back onto the shelf (i.e backward, upside down, etc). In spite of the fact that in group theory you're only looking at a single operator (addition, multiplication, moving a book around) on a set of elements (integers, positive reals, a book) groups can actually get very complicated. So, in group theory we often want to map a more complicated group to a simpler group.
Now, in each of the above groups there is an "identity" element in the group: zero in addition of integers, 1 in multiplication of positive reals, and with the book the identity corresponds to picking the book up and then putting it back just the way you found it. If we map a complicated group to one of these simpler groups, then the _kernel_ is the set of all elements of the complicated group that map to the identity of the simpler group.
Here's an example.
Complicated group: integers under addition
Simple group: the numbers 0 and 1 with respect to addition modulo 2 (i.e. 0+0=0, 0+1=1, 1+1=0)
Mapping: even numbers map to 0, odd numbers map to 1.
Identity of simple group: 0 (N+0=N, right?)
Kernel of mapping: all even integers (in the complicated group), because all even integers (in the complicated group) map to zero (in the simple group)
That wasn't so bad, now was it?
Scott
Re:Here you go, a layman's explanation. (Score:2)
Re:Here you go, a layman's explanation. (Score:2)
Re:my contribution (Score:2)
IIRC, his tomb said "to hide well is to live well" or somethign to that effect.
A big deal? (Score:1)
and is an institute professor, which is supposed to be a big deal.
I checked the link and I understand the significance, but come on! If they want to elevate a member of their faculty, you'd think that the bright people at MIT could come up with a title that sounds like it says more than, "Yeah, he teaches here".
Did a little google on this thing (Score:5, Funny)
"In the mathematics of manifolds and differential operators, the Atiyah-Singer index theorem is a basic general result that came at the end of a long development on the theory of elliptic operators (such as Laplacians), going back to the Riemann-Roch theorem. There have been a number of subsequent developments, in particular in the work of Alain Connes.
We start with a compact smooth manifold (without boundary) and an elliptic operator E on it. Here E is a differential operator acting on smooth sections of a given vector bundle. The property of being elliptic is expressed by a symbol s that can be seen as coming from the coefficients of the highest order part of E; s is a bundle section and required to be non-zero. E.g. for a Laplacian s is a positive-definite quadratic form.
By some basic analytic theory the differential operator E gives rise to a Fredholm operator. Such a Fredholm operator has an index, defined as the difference between the dimension of the kernel of E (solutions of Ef = 0, the harmonic functions in a general sense) and the dimension of the cokernel of E (the constraints on the right-hand-side of an inhomogeneous equation like Ef = g)."
Which leads me to wonder:
HUH!?
Re:Did a little google on this thing (Score:4, Informative)
Differential Operator [wolfram.com]
Vector Bundle [wolfram.com]
Fredholm Operator [wikipedia.org]
Cokernel [wolfram.com]
Now, armed with all those definitions of all the unfamiliar terms in that paragraph, complete with links to the terms used in the definitions (which are themselves complete with links to all the terms used in the definitions of the definitions, ad nauseum), you've got all you need to understand those two paragraphs! Isn't the Internet great?
Re:Oh yes! now it all makes sense. (Score:1)
Re:Did a little google on this thing (Score:1)
Re:Did a little google on this thing (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Did a little google on this thing (Score:1)
Since you did so well, here's another challenge
The theorem is said to have played a role in futhering understanding of particle physics. What was that role? What theoretic physical systems are mappable to this theorem?
And then for the extra-credit problem
What is the connection between the vast complexity
Mod up this post (Score:1)
Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem (Score:5, Informative)
And this [encyclopedia4u.com] is the least technical definition I have come across so far.
Trawling thru the USENET I found:
The Atiyah-Singer expression is:
where X is a G-manifold for G cyclic, generated by g, ch()(g) is an equivariant Chern character for trivial G-spaces, U is a combination of characteristic classes which "accounts for" the normal bundle N^g of X^g (the fixed set of X) in X, Td is the Todd class, and the determinant is evident.
Apparently the INVARIANCE THEORY, THE HEAT EQUATION, AND THE ATIYAH-SINGER INDEX THEOREM [www.emis.de] is a good source too.
And This book:
"The Atiyah-Singer index theorem and Elementary number theory" F. Hirzebruch and D. Zagier (Publish or Perish)
Moderate this comment
Negative: Offtopic [mithuro.com] Flamebait [mithuro.com] Troll [mithuro.com] Redundant [mithuro.com]
Positive: Insightful [mithuro.com] Interesting [mithuro.com] Informative [mithuro.com] Funny [mithuro.com]
Re:Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem (Score:1)
This formula is way over my head (high in the stratosphere) but I quite sure that a multiplication takes 2 arguments.
By the way, "G-manifold for G cyclic, generated by g, ch()(g) is an equivariant Chern character for trivial G-spaces" convinced me of the superiority of the Gnome desktop over KDE.
Re:Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem (Score:1, Informative)
Index (D_E) = ( Td(M) ch(E), [M] )
where D_E is a specific differential operator constructed using the vector bundle E and the Dirac operator on M. (It turns out that as far as index theory goes every elliptic differential operator can more-or-less be rewritten as
Rich rewards for everybody (Score:5, Interesting)
As many people have experienced, studying the higher mathematics is incrediby rewarding, intellectually, especially the parts that have nothing to do with numbers (ie. most). Even if you don't get into the intricacies of stringent proofs of theorems, it is still a world of such incredible wonder. Are you fascinated by science fiction and fantasy? Then mathematics should be able to captivate you; personally I can't think of anything more mindblowing than such things as topology, geometry and algebra.
Re:Rich rewards for everybody (Score:2)
You're right there, I definitely found it mind-blowing in university. My nose still bleeds from time to time, ten years after, as a result...
Re:Rich rewards for everybody (Score:2)
Me, either. Of course, it's not my mind I'd like to have blown...
because most people here (Score:5, Funny)
So... should we move this to an AOL chatroom or what?
Exploring the math universe (Score:1)
He said it feels like it was already there.
Already where?
My wife answers that by saying "in the math universe", which is filled with beautiful abstractions and shortcuts instead of the clunky assemblies of matter and stretches of distance that make up our universe.
Re:Rich rewards for everybody (Score:2)
I Hear Ya (Score:3, Funny)
Tell me about it. I was just talking to my voluptuous Swedish masseuse girlfriend about the Atiyah-Singer index theorem and she was all like, "Oooohhhhhh take me NOW!" but in a Swedish accent and stuff.
One of the most exciting developments in the last decade, indeed.
Talisman
Re:I Hear Ya (Score:2, Funny)
(for future reference)
Re:I Hear Ya (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I Hear Ya (Score:2)
Blow up dolls don't talk... not unless you put a tape recorder on them Teddy Ruxspin style. ;)
Lot of work for poor result (Score:2, Funny)
This is by far the dumbest pickup line since "do you want to see my japanese paintings at home". Math theories definitely won't help you drop hints to girls in a night club you know...
Atiyah Singer index theorem (Score:5, Informative)
The Atiyah-Singer index theorem provides a link between algebraic topology, the study of 'large-scale', structural properties of manifolds, and advanced calculus on manifolds. So in order to precisely understand what the theorem states, some background in those two areas is essential. But I'll try to give some examples of the concepts that it deals with.
The index of a differential operator A is the difference dim (ker A) - dim (coker A), where dim means dimension, ker A means the kernel of A, and coker means the cokernel of A. The kernel and cokernel are somewhat analogous to their meanings in linear algebra, for an n x n square matrix A, just as differential operators and matrices have many analogous properties. In linear algebra the kernel is also sometimes known as nullspace, the space of vectors x with A x = 0. The cokernel is slightly more involved. For a matrix A, it is the orthogonal complement of its range, the space of y such that A x = y for some x. With some linear algebra you can prove that for an n x n matrix A, dim (ker A) - dim (coker A) = 0.
But with differential operators it is more complex. To take an example of the real line, R, and the differential operator d/dx, the kernel clearly has dimension one, whereas the cokernel has dimension zero, which is rather easy to see intuitively, but could require some work to prove carefully, I'm not sure. Anyway, the Atiyah-Singer index theorem deals instead with multidimensional differential operators, and pseudodifferential operators instead of differential operators. The pseudodifferential operators are a superset of differential operators, defined via Fourier analysis.
I don't know how the topological side could be illustrated that well...The topological invariants that appear on the other side of the theorem are in some ways similar to describing the deformation invariant structure of a manifold by counting holes on it, but the topology that the index theorem deals with is vastly more general and powerful and doesn't necessarily have much to do with holes anymore.
The index theorem has been used for example in particle physics where the topology of the spacetime manifold can be used to obtain information about the Dirac operator for fermions, which is an elliptic (pseudo)differential operator, the operator class that the index theorem deals with.
There is a good book by Booss and Blecker on the subject: "Topology and Analysis: the Atiyah-Singer Index Formula and Gauge-Theoretic Physics
", geared toward physical applications. Too Amazon doesn't seem to have it. "Spin geometry" by Lawson and Michelsohn is also pretty good. I am reading those two books at the moment..
Re:Atiyah Singer index theorem (Score:3, Funny)
And them boys got the Navel Price for studying manifolds? There ain't nothing special 'bout them, just bolt them to the block, stick the exhaust pipe right on the other end, and tighten the collar real good, and that's it. Awh been doin' that fer twenty years now ya know, and I ain't never got no price...
I have one small correction... (Score:5, Funny)
For some reason, your word processor has randomly substituded the word "clearly" in your discussion of topology and differential equations.
Microsoft has confirmed this to be a problem with certain math professors and graduate students.
Solution:Installation of Girlfriend 1.0 or Real Life 2.37 or higher appears to correct the problem
Temporary Workaround: If the above programs are not available, automatically replacing the word "clearly" with "confusingly" seems to retain the sentence's grammatical structure and enforce its true meaning.
Re:I have one small correction... (Score:3, Informative)
It is the space of functions f(x) with df(x)/dx = 0. This means that f(x) = c. The dimension of the space of functions f(x) = c for some c is 1-dimensional.
Re:I have one small correction... (Score:1)
Cool (Score:1, Troll)
(Comes from not reading the articles, ever!)
From what I heared... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:From what I heared... (Score:1)
topology (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a lot of incomprehension in the comments about higher mathematics. The fact that all four of the Clay Mathematics Institute Research Fellows [claymath.org] this year are not native Americans indicates the truth of the AeA's comment on math teaching in American schools. [slashdot.org] I note that all of the fellows are in topology or closely related areas. My doctorate is in combinatorics, "the slums of topology", so I'm probably not qualified to explain the Atiyah-Singer theorem to y'all!
Re:topology (Score:2)
:-|
Actually, it probably doesn't, but heck, I'm having mixed feelings about this particular piece of news:- should I feel proud that another Akshay has sc
maybe this will help, probably not (Score:4, Informative)
With that said, I included a couple of links below:
Wikipedia's explanation on the problem [wikipedia.org]
an insanely terse definition with a bibliography of the originally sited papers [wolfram.com]
Good news! (Score:4, Interesting)
For all those not initiated to deeper mathematics, there's a simpler online proof [www.emis.de] that uses the heat equation instead to prove the Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem.
Of course, the first chapter alone is over 80 pages of functional analysis, but still...
Practical Application of the Atiyah-Singer Theorum (Score:5, Funny)
You need to look past the obvious sometimes, young Grasshoppers. Lets apply the Atiyah-Singer Theorum to a night club scenario.
A nightclub, is a bounded 3-D dimensional space, which may be inhabited by (amongst other things), a collection of personages, which are nothing more than manifolds in a 4-D continuum.
The Atiyah-Singer theorum proposes that there is a deep connection between the index of the manifold, and the topological nature for each personage.
Having a rich understanding of the index of the vector bundles for these manifolds can then allow you to derive the underlying topology of these unbounded mainfolds.
The underlying aim of being in the Night Club, for our purposes, is to ultimately deduce the underlying topology of the subject, without having to physically remove their clothes, or subject them to X-rays or invasive procedures.
By applying the Atiyah-Singer theorum in this case, we can compare the vector normals for surface vectors around the chest area of the subject. You will quickly note that some subjects have a more or less constant vector normal for this section, whilst others have an interesting flowing perturbation of the surface, yieling a set of vectors which significantly alter the index of the entire manifold.
Other more subtle clues abound
As AC explained in the pretzel example, topological invariants include things like the number of holes in the preztel. And here is the crux of the matter, my learned friends.
We can now select from a set of 4-D manifolds, those manifolds which are most likely to offer up a set of invariants for a finite space of time in the near future space-time continuum, because amongst all of the nightclub inhabitants, our superior mathematical abilities allow us to quickly compute indeces and probabilities, as well as quantum outcomes.
Your choice of invariants is entirely up to you, each to his / her own, I say.
This, ladies and gentleman, is why great mathematians of both sexes and persuasions, manage to get laid as often and as varied as they so choose, whilst the dumb-ass jocks of the world have to make do with watching football, getting drunk with their mates, or mindlessly burning rubber on public roads.
Its pure Darwinism in action.
Re:Practical Application of the Atiyah-Singer Theo (Score:2)
You can grab a person by the mouth and ass hole and then diffeomorph them into a torus by evening out their digestive system.
Therefore all humans are S(1)xS(1)
unless they have something stuck up their ass, in which case they are S(2)
__________________
Is it any coincidence that the doughnut and coffee mug are also topologically equivalent?
__________________
I shall now refer to the surjective mapping from S(1)xS(1) -> S(2) as the "butt-plug" project
Don't feel bad (Score:2)
Don't feel bad about not understanding the details of this. I have a masters degree in math (and know a good deal about topology and analysis) and this stuff is still mostly jibberish to me. This is very deep stuff. But the way it interconnects math and physics is very interesting.
Intro to Topology (Score:3, Informative)
Ok, I'm back from the bookshelf, and I was entirely mistaken. The book I was refering to above is by Paul Alexandroff and is called _Elementary Concepts of Toplogy_. The book right beside it (also very small) is in fact by Michael Atiyah -- _The Geometry and Physics of Knots_. It is not at all a book for non-mathematicians, but for the record, covers interrelations between knot theory, topological invariants and differential geometry in an astounding breadth for such a slim volume. Wonderful stuff.
Scott
The Abel Prize (Score:5, Informative)
The Abel prize [abelprisen.no] is introduced as a sort of "Nobel Prize of math" where people are rewarded for results and achievements that have shown themselves to be of lasting value in the field. Alfred Nobel did not want there to be a Nobel Prize in math, since he himself saw little scientific value of math! The most prestigious prize in math before the Abel came into being is the Fields medal [st-and.ac.uk], but this prize is only given to younger mathematicians (belove the age of 40) that has made break-through results and also show promise for the future. The Fields medal is handed out every 4 years while the Abel will be handed out every year (first prize was handed out last year).
Must have been ironic for Abel if he were to know that such a huge money prize is to be given out in his name, when his whole life he had to live in poverty and fight to get time and money to do his scientific work. The irony of Abel's life is also that Abel himself finally got a professorship in Berlin but too late; the letter was sent to him two days after his death.
Re:The Abel Prize (Score:2)
The prize amount is 6 million NOK (about 750,000 Euro) and was awarded for the first time on 3 June 2003.
That's about $909k USD [yahoo.com].
Re:The Abel Prize (Score:2)
Well, you can notice that Atiyah got the Fields Medal at the age of 37 (he was born in 1929) while Singer never got the prize (he was born in 1924). I guess one can draw ones own conclusions, but it takes time before one are sure that a new result in a scientific field is valid and profound ...
What's this? (Score:1)
Where to learn about abstract mathematics? (Score:2)
Re:Where to learn about abstract mathematics? (Score:1)
Re:Where to learn about abstract mathematics? (Score:1, Informative)
Math and CS (Score:1)
Some of the comments here bring to mind a complaint I have, even if these comments are funny (e.g. "Now all they have to do is derive a theorem that can solve the conundrum that is, how to share the trophy between them equally each
Re:Math and CS (Score:1)
Re:Math and CS (Score:1)
Re:Math and Caches (Score:1)
wow (Score:1)
Professional Relationship (Score:1)
More Info (Score:1)
Here [wolfram.com] is some more information.
Re: (Score:1)
That sweet star trek feeling.... (Score:2)
What award? (Score:1)
Wait.. is that singer? Is this a grammy... wait... no
What... it's an Abel award. What is that? An award you get when your brother kills you (/biblical reference).