B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 1 Otelbaev published a paper claiming solved navier stokes problem |
n*******l
发帖数: 2911 | 2 估计有一批人真的要失业了。
对了，最近做流体的学生／博士后就业形式怎么样？似乎很多人对做流体的不感兴趣。
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: Otelbaev published a paper claiming solved navier stokes problem
|
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 3 不严谨的说，应该又是瞎哄哄
不好
嗯哪
【在 n*******l 的大作中提到】
: 估计有一批人真的要失业了。
: 对了，最近做流体的学生／博士后就业形式怎么样？似乎很多人对做流体的不感兴趣。
|
w*q
发帖数: 1544 | 4 低谷时期啊
【在 n*******l 的大作中提到】
: 估计有一批人真的要失业了。
: 对了，最近做流体的学生／博士后就业形式怎么样？似乎很多人对做流体的不感兴趣。
|
w*q
发帖数: 1544 | 5 去看了一下这个paper，是用俄语写的。没办法看啊。 |
w**k
发帖数: 320 | 6 俄国人真nm强
【在 w*q 的大作中提到】
: 去看了一下这个paper，是用俄语写的。没办法看啊。
|
m*******r
发帖数: 18 | 7 不是说是哈萨克斯坦人么？
【在 w**k 的大作中提到】
: 俄国人真nm强
|
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 8 Tao表示，果然
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: 不严谨的说，应该又是瞎哄哄
: 不好
: 嗯哪
|
w*q
发帖数: 1544 | 9 tao怎么说的？
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: Tao表示，果然
|
w*q
发帖数: 1544 | 10 居然在参考文献里面没有提到Caffarelli的工作。 |
|
|
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 11 His web what's new
【在 w*q 的大作中提到】
: 居然在参考文献里面没有提到Caffarelli的工作。
|
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 12 搜他以前关于global regularity的帖子，看回复更新
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: His web what's new
|
w**k
发帖数: 320 | 13 给个链接撒
tao文章太多找花眼
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: 搜他以前关于global regularity的帖子，看回复更新
|
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | |
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 15 i have to apologize on one thing
i mean the last second comment.
but that comment is made by a anonymous, not Tao.
I received the updates by cellphone, hard to tell who made it.
So i thought it was Tao.
sorry for that.
but the comments seem to be reasonable.
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: http://terrytao.wordpress.com/2007/03/18/why-global-regularity-
|
w**k
发帖数: 320 | 16 感觉没有很严肃的质疑
看来还是要等等
估计俄文是个不小的障碍
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: i have to apologize on one thing
: i mean the last second comment.
: but that comment is made by a anonymous, not Tao.
: I received the updates by cellphone, hard to tell who made it.
: So i thought it was Tao.
: sorry for that.
: but the comments seem to be reasonable.
|
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 17 The questioning seems to be reasonable, e.g. Pressure is essentially a
LaGrange multiplier,no BC should be imposed,etc. of cos,I am not able to
read the paper either,just guess. The language shouldn't be the problem.
I talked to titi today, he doesn't seem to be excited either. =
【在 w**k 的大作中提到】
: 感觉没有很严肃的质疑
: 看来还是要等等
: 估计俄文是个不小的障碍
|
w*q
发帖数: 1544 | 18 我靠，您老人家是titi身边的人啊。
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: The questioning seems to be reasonable, e.g. Pressure is essentially a
: LaGrange multiplier,no BC should be imposed,etc. of cos,I am not able to
: read the paper either,just guess. The language shouldn't be the problem.
: I talked to titi today, he doesn't seem to be excited either. =
|
B********e
发帖数: 10014 | 19 No,熟人而已hiahia
【在 w*q 的大作中提到】
: 我靠，您老人家是titi身边的人啊。
|
w*q
发帖数: 1544 | 20 tao教授的意见来了：
Villatoro’s blog has some detailed analysis, and has recently raised some
serious issues with the paper as well, in the crucial Section 6. (It’s in
Spanish, but this is easy to translate online.)
I can’t read Russian either, so I am happy to defer the detailed checking
to others, but my feeling is that this sort of abstract approach to the
regularity problem, using only the energy identity and harmonic analysis
estimates on the nonlinearity rather than more precise geometric information
specific to the Navier-Stokes equation (e.g. the vorticity equation) is
necessarily doomed to failure. I think I can formalise a specific
obstruction in this regard and hope to present it here in a couple weeks.
【在 B********e 的大作中提到】
: No,熟人而已hiahia
|
a**********u
发帖数: 28450 | 21 他做过这个方面的研究，所以这个评论还是中肯。
information
【在 w*q 的大作中提到】
: tao教授的意见来了：
: Villatoro’s blog has some detailed analysis, and has recently raised some
: serious issues with the paper as well, in the crucial Section 6. (It’s in
: Spanish, but this is easy to translate online.)
: I can’t read Russian either, so I am happy to defer the detailed checking
: to others, but my feeling is that this sort of abstract approach to the
: regularity problem, using only the energy identity and harmonic analysis
: estimates on the nonlinearity rather than more precise geometric information
: specific to the Navier-Stokes equation (e.g. the vorticity equation) is
: necessarily doomed to failure. I think I can formalise a specific
|
