Friday, March 30, 2007

The Complexity Blog Lives!

Various people have urged Lance to keep the Blog going, perhaps under new management. Some have suggested Bill Gasarch (me) . Some have suggested anyone except Bill Gasarch. Lance flipped a coin and it came up with anyone but bill gasarch . However, not one to leave things to random chance, Lance offered me to take it over, and I accepted.

PROS: The blog will live!
CONS: It will have far more capital letters.
CONS: Fewer postings, probably twice a week. But that how Lance started.

I am honored to carry on the tradition, and will have my first real post next week. bill gasarch

17 comments:

  1. Thanks for doing this, Bill. I think the community will help you out with ideas as time goes on.

    If you'd like an idea for a post, I note that Paul "Continuum Hypothesis" Cohen just died.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Long live complexity blogs!

    ReplyDelete
  3. If you'd like an idea for a post, I note that Paul "Continuum Hypothesis" Cohen just died.
    Scott already blogged about that on March 24th.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Le blog est mort! VIVE LE BLOG!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Is Lance gonna guest blog?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Will Lance be the guest on most complexity casts now?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks, Bill! What an optimistic end to a dreary week. The "F" tab will stay, even if it changes to "G". I'm looking forward to your contributions.

    And speaking of Hypotheses with capital H's, have you heard any buzz from your mathematical colleagues on the alleged disproof of the Riemann Hypothesis (by an eminent mathematician, at http://arxiv.org/abs/math.NT/0703367)?

    -- Fred.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Tribikram Pati is a real mathematician, but I wouldn't call him an eminent mathematician. I count 5 publications since the 1960's, so he is no longer particularly active in research.

    I don't know of anyone who has found an error in his disproof, but nobody seems to be taking it very seriously. I've flipped through it, and I'm skeptical since I can't identify what makes it work. He messes around in relatively unmotivated ways and then arrives at a contradiction. It feels to me like the sort of proof that is very likely to have a mistake, but of course I can't say for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  9. That's great news!!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. wow!! this is a good news... i am anon 69 of lance's last post.... i am thrilled to hear the blog survives.... i will miss lance.... but loking forwards to hearing from bill ...

    ReplyDelete
  11. very very nice informations.thanks for this blog. mr silici...

    ReplyDelete
  12. awesome! way to step up :)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yay! Thanks for doing this. (But wait, does that mean this will be a Van der Warden blog now?!?)

    --Yarden

    ReplyDelete
  14. -- Good luck, Bill... Waiting for your posts.
    -- Thanks again, Lance... Hope that you'll have time to post from time to time.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Soon this will be the 'who the hell is lance fortnow' weblog.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks so much for doing this blog. I read it everyday.

    ReplyDelete