Have anybody received hitherto the Clay Institutes's award for solving Riemann's Hypothesis?
477417
NO. It is still unsolved.
574891
im pretty sure that you will have to use the parts method to solve it. but the answer is\n\nx(log(1-ie^(ix))-log(1+ie^(ix))+i(Li(-ie^(ix)-Li(ie^(ix))\n\ni=imaginary unit\nlog=natural logarithm\nLi=polylogarithm\n\nyou can check my answer to see if its right because i also thought that it was wrong. i dont know how the imaginary units could have shown up but o well.
714221
Mr. Franklin \nAmadeo Avogadro\nDalton\nJ.J. thomson \nRutherfurd\nMarie and Pierre Curie\nJohannes Nicolaus Brønsted\nJohn Dalton\nEmil Erlenmeyer\nMichael Faraday\nFritz Haber\nHenri Louis Le Chatelier\nThomas Martin Lowrey\nDimitri Mendeleev\nAlfred Bernhard Nobel\nJohannes Diderik van der Waals\nneils bohr\nif u wanna know more email me and ill tell u all about them, i hope i get ur best answer award
1147966
Yes!!!!!!!!! Email me, and I'll try to shed more light on this. Parabolas are where my genius comes out :)
79457
There is no Nobel Prize in mathematics. The closest thing is the Fields medal.
239657
http://www.claymath.org/millennium/
1106566
[edit]\nPhysics\nMain Article: Nobel Prize in Physics \n2005 Roy J. Glauber, John L. Hall, Theodor W. Hänsch\n\n2004 David J. Gross, H. David Politzer, Frank Wilczek\n\n2003 Alexei A. Abrikosov, Vitaly L. Ginzburg, Anthony J. Leggett\n\n2002 Raymond Davis Jr., Masatoshi Koshiba, Riccardo Giacconi\n\n2001 Eric A. Cornell, Wolfgang Ketterle, Carl E. Wieman\n\n2000 Zhores I. Alferov, Herbert Kroemer, Jack S. Kilby\n\n1999 Gerardus 't Hooft, Martinus J.G. Veltman\n\n1998 Robert B. Laughlin, Horst L. Störmer, Daniel C. Tsui\n\n1997 Steven Chu, Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, William D. Phillips\n\n1996 David M. Lee, Douglas D. Osheroff, Robert C. Richardson\n\n1995 Martin L. Perl, Frederick Reines\n\n1994 Bertram N. Brockhouse, Clifford G. Shull\n\n1993 Russell A. Hulse, Joseph H. Taylor Jr.\n\n1992 Georges Charpak\n\n1991 Pierre-Gilles de Gennes\n\n1990 Jerome I. Friedman, Henry W. Kendall, Richard E. Taylor\n\n1989 Norman F. Ramsey, Hans G. Dehmelt, Wolfgang Paul\n\n1988 Leon M. Lederman, Melvin Schwartz, Jack Steinberger\n\n1987 J. Georg Bednorz, K. Alex Müller\n\n1986 Ernst Ruska, Gerd Binnig, Heinrich Rohrer\n\n1985 Klaus von Klitzing\n\n1984 Carlo Rubbia, Simon van der Meer\n\n1983 Subramanyan Chandrasekhar, William A. Fowler\n\n1982 Kenneth G. Wilson\n\n1981 Nicolaas Bloembergen, Arthur L. Schawlow, Kai M. Siegbahn\n\n1980 James Cronin, Val Fitch\n\n1979 Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, Steven Weinberg\n\n1978 Pyotr Kapitsa, Arno Penzias, Robert Woodrow Wilson\n\n1977 Philip W. Anderson, Sir Nevill F. Mott, John H. van Vleck\n\n1976 Burton Richter, Samuel C.C. Ting\n\n1975 Aage N. Bohr, Ben R. Mottelson, James Rainwater\n\n1974 Martin Ryle, Antony Hewish\n\n1973 Leo Esaki, Ivar Giaever, Brian D. Josephson\n\n1972 John Bardeen, Leon Neil Cooper, Robert Schrieffer\n\n1971 Dennis Gabor\n\n1970 Hannes Alfvén, Louis Néel\n\n1969 Murray Gell-Mann\n\n1968 Luis Alvarez\n\n1967 Hans Bethe\n\n1966 Alfred Kastler\n\n1965 Sin-Itiro Tomonaga, Julian Schwinger, Richard P. Feynman\n\n1964 Charles H. Townes, Nicolay G. Basov, Aleksandr M. Prokhorov\n\n1963 Eugene Wigner, Maria Goeppert-Mayer, J. Hans D. Jensen\n\n1962 Lev Landau\n\n1961 Robert Hofstadter, Rudolf Mössbauer\n\n1960 Donald A. Glaser\n\n1959 Emilio Segrè, Owen Chamberlain\n\n1958 Pavel A. Cherenkov, Il´ja M. Frank, Igor Y. Tamm\n\n1957 Chen Ning Yang, Tsung-Dao Lee\n\n1956 William B. Shockley, John Bardeen, Walter H. Brattain\n\n1955 Willis E. Lamb, Polykarp Kusch\n\n1954 Max Born, Walther Bothe\n\n1953 Frits Zernike\n\n1952 Felix Bloch, E. M. Purcell\n\n1951 John Cockcroft, Ernest T.S. Walton\n\n1950 Cecil Powell\n\n1949 Hideki Yukawa\n\n1948 Patrick M.S. Blackett\n\n1947 Edward V. Appleton\n\n1946 Percy W. Bridgman\n\n1945 Wolfgang Pauli\n\n1944 Isidor Isaac Rabi\n\n1943 Otto Stern\n\n1942 No prize awarded. 1/3 of the prize money for this year was allocated to the Main Fund, 2/3 to the Special Fund of the physics section.\n\n1941 No prize awarded. 1/3 of the prize money for this year was allocated to the Main Fund, 2/3 to the Special Fund of the physics section.\n\n1940 No prize awarded. 1/3 of the prize money for this year was allocated to the Main Fund, 2/3 to the Special Fund of the physics section.\n\n1939 Ernest Lawrence\n\n1938 Enrico Fermi\n\n1937 Clinton Davisson, George Paget Thomson\n\n1936 Victor F. Hess, Carl D. Anderson\n\n1935 James Chadwick\n\n1934 No prize awarded. 1/3 of the prize money for this year was allocated to the Main Fund, 2/3 to the Special Fund of the physics section.\n\n1933 Erwin Schrödinger, Paul A.M. Dirac\n\n1932 Werner Heisenberg\n\n1931 No prize awarded. The prize money for this year was allocated to the Special Fund of the physics section.\n\n1930 Venkata Raman\n\n1929 Louis de Broglie\n\n1928 Owen Willans Richardson\n\n1927 Arthur H. Compton, C.T.R. Wilson\n\n1926 Jean Baptiste Perrin\n\n1925 James Franck, Gustav Hertz\n\n1924 Manne Siegbahn\n\n1923 Robert A. Millikan\n\n1922 Niels Bohr\n\n1921 Albert Einstein\n\n1920 Charles Edouard Gui
310598
The subject is very complicated. On this theme there is a avery good divulgation book published by a great mathematician, Marcus Du Sautoy, "The Music of the Primes". It is a pure delice!
55082
No no solution since n>2\n\nPierre de Fermat died in 1665. Today we think of Fermat as a number theorist, in fact as perhaps the most famous number theorist who ever lived. It is therefore surprising to find that Fermat was in fact a lawyer and only an amateur mathematician. Also surprising is the fact that he published only one mathematical paper in his life, and that was an anonymous article written as an appendix to a colleague's book.\n\nThere is a statue of Fermat and his muse in his home town of Toulouse:\n(Click it to see a larger version)\n\n\nBecause Fermat refused to publish his work, his friends feared that it would soon be forgotten unless something was done about it. His son, Samuel undertook the task of collecting Fermat's letters and other mathematical papers, comments written in books, etc. with the object of publishing his father's mathematical ideas. In this way the famous 'Last theorem' came to be published. It was found by Samuel written as a marginal note in his father's copy of Diophantus's Arithmetica. \n\nFermat's Last Theorem states that \n\nxn + yn = zn \n\nhas no non-zero integer solutions for x, y and z when n > 2. Fermat wrote \n\nI have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain.
778163
The problem is to show that f is identically 0 using the density of the rational numbers. I would strongly suggest to the asker that they do their own homework at this level. If you don't understand the questions or techniques, you will have a *lot* of trouble later on.
653242
Check out http://math.mit.edu/research/index.html
592484
Wow...I am sending this to the Nobel Commitee.....your genius has not been fully explored....Send that guy a grant!!
385662
If you mean to use the Riemann integral, the function is not integrable since it is not bounded. For the Lebesgue integral, the rationals are a set of measure 0, so are irrelevant. In the interval (1/(n+1), 1/n], the function has value n, so the integral over that interval is [1/n-1/(n+1)]*n=1/(n+1).\nThe sun of 1/(n+1) from 1 to infinity diverges to infinity.
812949
In late 2002 and 2003 Grigori Perelman of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics, Saint Petersburg posted 3 papers on the arXiv:[7]\n\n    * The entropy formula for the Ricci flow and its geometric applications, 2002\n    * Ricci flow with surgery on three-manifolds, 2003\n    * Finite extinction time for the solutions to the Ricci flow on certain three-manifolds, 2003\n\nIn these papers he sketched a proof of the Poincaré conjecture and a more general conjecture, Thurston's geometrization conjecture, completing the Ricci flow program outlined earlier by Richard Hamilton.\n\nFrom May to July 2006, several groups presented papers that filled in the details of Perelman's proof of the Poincaré conjecture, as follows:\n\n    * Bruce Kleiner and John Lott, Notes on Perelman's Papers (May 2006) filled in the details of Perelman's proof of the geometrization conjecture.\n    * Zhu Xiping and Cao Huaidong, A Complete Proof of the Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures - Application of the Hamilton-Perelman theory of the Ricci flow (Asian Journal of Mathematics Volume 10, Number 2, p. 165-492 (June 2006)).\n    * John Morgan and Gang Tian Ricci Flow and the Poincaré Conjecture (July 2006) gave a detailed proof of just the Poincaré Conjecture (which is somewhat easier than the full geometrization conjecture).\n\nOn August 22, 2006, the ICM awarded Perelman the Fields Medal for his work on the conjecture, but Perelman refused the medal.[8][9][10] John Morgan spoke at the ICM on the Poincaré conjecture on August 24, 2006, declaring that "in 2003, Perelman solved the Poincaré Conjecture."[11]\n\nThe August 2006 issue of The New Yorker contains an article, titled "Manifold Destiny", on some of the issues surrounding Perelman's work.
818604
Never heard of it.  Have you tried Mathworld or Wikipedia?
483801
Obviously, proof is a little hard here. It is quite impossible for anyone to PROVE they know anything about this topic.\n\nTry reading Dante's "The Divine Comedy". It is quite intriguing to say the least.
464439
Yes, Andrew Wiles proved it a few years ago. He won the Wolf Prize in 1995-96.