Google Analytics

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Which Awards are well known? Why?

The ACM announced some awards which you can get to here: here

What is more prestigious?
  1. The Fields Medal (established 1936, around $15,000). (Also see Wikipedia Entry.) (Note that the IMU also gives out the Rolf Nevanlinna Prize (as of 1982) and the Carl Friedrich Gauss Prize for Applications of Mathematics (as of 2006). The webpage indicates they are on par with the Fields Medal.)
  2. The Turing Award (established 1966, around $250,000). (Also see Wikipedia Entry.)
  3. The Milennium prize problems (established 2000, $1,000,000 per problem). (Also see Wikipedia Entry.)
  4. The King Faisal International prize (established 1976, around $200,000). (Also see Wikipedia Entry.)
You may be wondering What is the King Faisal International prize? It is a prize sponsored by the King Faisal Foundation, which wikipedia says is one of the largest philanthroic founcations in the world. They give awards in five areas: (1) Service to Islam, (2) Islamic Studies, (3) Arabic Language and literature, (4) Medicine, (5) Science. The Science award has gone to people in Math several times.

My impression is that this award is not as well known as the Fields Medal or Turing Award. (Commenters- agree? disagree?) Why is this? More generally, what makes an award prestigious?
  1. Money: But the Fields Medal, at $15,000, is still more prestigious then the King Faisal international prize.
  2. Time: The Fields Medal and the Turing Award were established longer ago. At the time there weren't that many other prizes out there to compete with.
  3. Focus: The King Faisal international award is for both Islamic Studies of various sorts and for science of various sorts. This makes it may make it harder to report on and talk about. The Fields Medal and the Turing award are focuses. Milennium Prize even more so.
  4. Quality of the Winners: A quick glance at the people who have won the King Faisal International prize for Science who did mathematics shows that they made excellent choices. So this is not the issue.
Is there a money/time/focus tradeoff? If I prove it then can I win a Fields Medal? (NO-I'm over 40. Oh well.) Consider that the Millennium Prize problems has only been around since the year 2000, BUT is far more money and far more focused. So it confers prestige.

Which would you rather win: A Fields Medal or a King Faisal International Prize for Science? Whats more important, Money or Prestige? Or perhaps if you win the Faisal award your winning will make it better known. A better chance of hitting the big money is to go on DEAL OR NO DEAL.

33 comments:

  1. A Fields medal is probably worth a lot more. If you have a fields medal you'll be to demand a much larger salary from whichever university you teach at. For example, Vauhgn Jones has the highest salary of any professor in the entire University of California system (just salary, not counting patent money and such). And I bet the Fields Medalists at, say, Chicago or Princeton make more than Jones, I just don't think their salaries are public.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's not clear what prestige means anyway.

    The Turing award confers a lot of fame and visibility. However, it has suffered from inconsistent standards in the past. Some awards have been well deserved and others much less so (or at least that is many people's perception in TCS).

    The Fields medal is slightly more obscure (among non-mathematicians) but has higher standards. Of course no prize makes perfect selections, but if you ask any group of mathematicians, they will agree that essentially all the Fields medalists have been truly amazing mathematicians (while the same is not true for the Turing award in CS).

    The Millennium prize problems are a shameless attempt by Clay to associate his name with famous problems. Unfortunately, they have been relatively successful: offering a million dollars is a good way to get attention. Except for the Nobel prize, I suspect this is the prize most likely to impress non-experts; by contrast, experts care more about the problems than the prizes.

    The King Faisal prize hardly matters at all. Except for the money, nobody cares or even knows who wins. It's just a way for the Saudi royal family to feel that they really matter for more reasons than controlling a big chunk of the world's oil supply.

    ReplyDelete

  3. The Turing award confers a lot of fame and visibility. ...
    The Fields medal is slightly more obscure

    This is nonsense. The romance of a Field's medal is incomparably greater -- partly because mathematics is a much more shared treasure across cultures than Computer Science is. I would even venture to say that the Turing Award is little known outside North America -- while the Fields medal is of course
    known across the world.

    Also, the stories of the lives of the Fields medallists are much more poignant -- from the life-story of Grothendieck, to de Branges' famous trip to Leningrad to explain his proof of the Bieberbach Conjecture, to the contemporary tale of Perelman's refusal of the medal -- the Turing Prize has nothing in comparison.

    Also, there is no point in comparing the Nevallina Prize to the Fields despite the appearances.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A quick Google search shows that while Jones makes quite a bit, he doesn't receive the highest salary in the UC system. For example, Busuttil receives more. Check out http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/news/casalary/uc?Submit=Page&agency=UC&otmax=&o=0&term=&sort=&ord=

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Which would you rather win: A Fields Medal or a King Faisal International Prize for Science?"

    Hmm, that is a tough one. The most prestigious award in math, or an award named after a Middle Eastern dictator? Seriously, would you accept a Kim Il Sung Prize or a Mobuto Medal if offered?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The most prestigious award in math ...

    Because of the age-restriction on the Fields medallists (which excludes people like Andrew Wiles), it is probably fair to say that now the "most prestigious award in math" is the Abel prize given by the Norwegian academy and not the Fields. The Abel prize should now be thought of as the missing "Nobel Prize" in mathematics. The Fields medal remains better known partly because of history, and partly because they are announced at the ICM.

    There is no reason to demean the King Faisal Prize because of the name. We should be happy that mathematics was chosen to be one of the disciplines in which it is awarded.

    ReplyDelete
  7. King Faisal prize has no mining. The underlining intention of a prize is very important. The name also matters, but it can change in time, like the King Oscar's prize won by Poancre, and many scholarships that are given in states. If one looks at the personality of some of these people whom the prized are named after, you will see what I mean. The more important, IMHO, is who is awarding the prize, who are the committee. ACM, IMU, Norway Academy of Science, or say King Faisal's Foundation.
    The importance people give to a prize is what makes it more preferable to win.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To Anon 5: If the Kim il Sung prize
    was worth $1,000,000,000
    and had always gone to an excellent
    computer science theorist, and it was offered to you, would you
    turn it down? This is not a rhetorical question and I would not criticize either answer.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "To Anon 5: If the Kim il Sung prize
    was worth $1,000,000,000
    and had always gone to an excellent
    computer science theorist, and it was offered to you, would you
    turn it down? This is not a rhetorical question and I would not criticize either answer."

    Excellent question! First, my decision would have NOTHING to do with whether the other awardees had been prestigious or not. Second, if it is a huge amount of money, I might take it. But if I did, I should donate most of it to a worthy cause, probably one involved in getting rid of that odious regime or at least improving conditions. I guess I should donate all of it, and I hope demonstrators would be outside my office until I do.

    So I have no problem with someone excepting the Feisal price and later renouncing the regime and giving the money to a suitable cause. But attending the ceremony, and then pocketing the money as if everything was OK, that is wrong.

    Also a concern is where the money is coming from. Starving North Korean farmers? Nobody is starving in Saudi Arabia, but still the money is looted from the country by the Royal family.

    Anon5

    ReplyDelete
  10. Which would you rather win: A Fields Medal or a King Faisal International Prize for Science?



    Who cares ? As Alain Connes so aptly put it -- "Mathematicans work for the grudging approbation of a few friends."

    If you are in it to win prizes, then you are in the wrong profession. Remember Gauss, Euler, Lobachevsky, Galois, Frobenius, Schur, Riemann, Ramanujan, Courant, Hilbert (to name a few) never won any prize in their lives and in fact many of them led rather miserable and short lives -- some of them like Lobachevsky and Galois did not even get the grudging approbation of their peers bit.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Because of the age-restriction on the Fields medallists (which excludes people like Andrew Wiles), it is probably fair to say that now the "most prestigious award in math" is the Abel prize given by the Norwegian academy and not the Fields.

    It's fair to say that maybe it should be or will be, but I don't think it is yet. It's not even clear what sort of prize the Abel prize will turn out to be. Will it be given most often for one singularly great achievement? For a lifetime of influence on the field (without necessarily requiring a spectacular peak)? Will it be preferentially given to people who didn't get the Fields medal? (That will of course never be part of the rules, but the short history of the prize suggests that it may be being used partly to remedy old injustices; for example, the fields represented are strikingly different from those that have received the most Fields medals, and I believe this is a conscious choice. I don't know whether it will hurt the prize's prestige.) Only time will tell whether the Abel prize committee maintains the highest standards.

    ReplyDelete
  12. There is no reason to demean the King Faisal Prize because of the name.


    It would be racist to demean it literally because of the name, but there's nothing wrong with demeaning it because of the behavior of the Saudi royal family. I can't imagine accepting a prize offered by a king who (just to list one example) gives women hardly any freedom.

    However, regardless of my opinions of Saudi Arabia, the prize is really meaningless. Who cares which scientists the king likes best (even if he hired some top experts to choose for him)? When a prize is given by a learned society, it is meaningful because (or to the extent that) it expresses the consensus of the community. When a prize is given by the king of Saudi Arabia, all it means is that he has plenty of money and a desire to improve his and his country's reputation.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Establishing the prestige of an award is a chicken and egg problem. There are two ways to solve it. Gradually and suddenly.

    Gradual method is to introduce an award in a domain which has none or very few ones. Many of the classical awards belong to this category. I am sure there must be many more awards which were introduced hundreds years ago, but did not succeed so we forget about them.

    The sudden method is to put something catchy with the award. For an example, Noble memorial prize in economics. Another method to make an award suddenly attractive is to put a pile of money next to it. This brings attention to the award. Even Netflix competition or those space flights awards are some example. Millenium prize actually belong to that category. It is an award for achieving something very specific.

    Saying this commentary, I like to point out that the award money even those which sounds like a million bucks, is not something which is the main attraction to the winner. If this was the main attraction, even the candidates who are considered for these awards are capable of making this kind, and the winners could regularly make this kind of money. But many of these people choose to pursue their scientific romance and not money (as long as it is sufficient for them to leave a peaceful life, emphasis on peaceful, which takes me to the earlier post on tenure, which is worth a lot to people who wants to fully use it to pursue their highly ambitious scientific dreams).

    As somebody else noticed, even the award money itself is not the major attraction. The top academic/research institutions highly value these awards. This is certainly the case with Microsoft. A major award winner is highly respected, both with the title (e.g., Fellow) and the payscale (this is my guess, since I am not there (yet:) )

    So my conclusion is that the prize money is there for organizers to attract attention. But once the attention is gotten, ultimately the prestige of the award is decided by who gets it and who pays attention to it. Who organizes/sponsors the award is the part of the Network effect.

    ReplyDelete
  14. However, regardless of my opinions of Saudi Arabia, the prize is really meaningless. Who cares which scientists the king likes best (even if he hired some top experts to choose for him)? When a prize is given by a learned society, it is meaningful ...

    What about the Kyoto Prize, the Israel Prize, or closer to home fellowships such as those awarded by the Sloan, Guggenheim or MacArthur Foundations -- all of which are considered as Prizes of some value, but not awarded by learned societies ? I suspect the criticism of the King Faisal Prize has to do with cultural intolerance if not racism at some level.

    ReplyDelete
  15. To the last Anon: "I suspect the criticism of the King Faisal Prize has to do with cultural intolerance if not racism at some level."

    Oh, yeah, how so? That is ridiculous. And it is also a nasty ad-hominem attack. Since when is it racist not to be fond of a particularly nasty regime?

    Now, I admit there is a fair amount of prejudice against Arab people in the West. But that has nothing to do with this discussion here. You can replace "Faisal" with "Pinochet" or "Honecker" and I still wouldn't take it.

    Anon5

    ReplyDelete
  16. You can replace "Faisal" with "Pinochet" or "Honecker" and I still wouldn't take it.


    How abiut a Rhodes scholarship ? Would you take that ?

    ReplyDelete
  17. It would be racist to demean it literally because of the name, but there's nothing wrong with demeaning it because of the behavior of the Saudi royal family. I can't imagine accepting a prize offered by a king who (just to list one example) gives women hardly any freedom.


    The kind of freedom a particular people have is a function of time, place and culture. Women couldn't vote in the US 80 years back and in parts of switzerland until 30 years back. You are judging a different culture by the standards of your culture.

    Just to give an example, gay people do not have rights in the US today that they have in some other countries. Both you and I can name several other detestable things the US has done, including keeping this King Faisal in power. Will you refuse a hypothetical Obama prize for these reason?

    The British crown was responsible for significantly worse treatment of its subjects during the colonial times (i.e. only 60 years back) than Faisal is treating his subjects. Will you turn down a knighthood for that reason?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I agree with Anon 17 that one should be careful about judging other societies when ones own is not in order. But I also think its ok to accept a prize from a regime that one finds odious and donate the money to its victims-- as Mumford did with the Israel prize last year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To Anon 18: Mumford won the Wolf Prize, not the Israel prize. The Wolf Foundation is a non-profit, endowed by private donations. Also, in the unlikely event I win a MacArthur fellowship or the Turing award, remind me to donate the money to a university in Cuba, Iraq or Afghanistan.

      Delete
  19. How about a prize financed with weapons trade money (aka. Nobel prizes), would you decline that?

    ReplyDelete
  20. The kind of freedom a particular people have is a function of time, place and culture. Women couldn't vote in the US 80 years back and in parts of switzerland until 30 years back. You are judging a different culture by the standards of your culture.

    Yes, exactly, I am, which is a good thing. My culture has serious problems now (which I am working to fix both by volunteering and by donating money) and had even more serious problems in the past. I'm ashamed of these problems, but they are no excuse for overlooking equally bad or even worse problems in other cultures.

    Are you seriously proposing that Saudia Arabia just hasn't reached the right time and place for freedom (maybe they aren't culturally ready to handle it)? Or that oppressing women is a charming bit of ancient culture that should be preserved for the sake of cultural diversity? It seems to me that the only reasonable approach is to insist that Saudia Arabia must change. That is indeed judging a different culture by the standards of my culture, but only because (in this particular case) my culture has higher standards and Saudi Arabians deserve to be treated according to those higher standards.

    Before anyone accuses me of saying this, let me point out that I'm not saying my culture is superior overall. That would be silly and offensive. However, I will say my culture treats women much better and Saudi women deserve the same.

    Will you refuse a hypothetical Obama prize for these reason?

    I don't think Obama is very similar to Faisal in any meaningful sense, but I am glad the US hasn't in fact chosen to spend its money on trying to improve its image by giving large global prizes. I think I'd be more embarrassed than offended if it did.

    The British crown was responsible for significantly worse treatment of its subjects during the colonial times (i.e. only 60 years back) than Faisal is treating his subjects.

    I have to disagree there and say that Saudi Arabia treats women worse than the British treated practically anybody. I'm not defending the British - what they did was awful. And, like the British, I'm certain most Saudis are great people and I would never hold this against them in the long run. However, I will hold it against their government right now.

    What about the Kyoto Prize, the Israel Prize, or closer to home fellowships such as those awarded by the Sloan, Guggenheim or MacArthur Foundations -- all of which are considered as Prizes of some value, but not awarded by learned societies?

    I do think the Sloan, Guggenheim, and MacArthur awards are overrated. The MacArthur in particular has a very poor track record and I'm mystified by why it is considered so important. This is evidence that not everyone shares my views (which doesn't mean they shouldn't :-).

    The Israel prize is irrelevant, since it is given only to Israelis. Just about every country has national prizes, and I hope Saudia Arabia does too. These prizes are generally of the greatest interest to citizens of those countries, as it should be.

    I'm only vaguely aware of the Kyoto prize, and I don't know how highly regarded it is.

    How abiut a Rhodes scholarship? Would you take that?

    That's a very interesting question. Certainly not if he were (miraculously) still alive. Possibly today, on the grounds that after more than a century the Rhodes Trust no longer serves any of the objectionable aims of Rhodes himself. Similarly, I wouldn't continue to hold Faisal's own misdeeds against his foundation forever. It's different when he's around actively oppressing his people.

    One key difference is that everybody who has ever been offered the Faisal prize is senior and well established and could afford to turn it down without suffering any real harm ($200K is nice, but I bet they aren't really suffering for lack of money). By contrast, many students would really benefit from a scholarship to study at Oxford.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "I have to disagree there and say that Saudi Arabia treats women worse than the British treated practically anybody. I'm not defending the British - what they did was awful."

    I would hope that as mathematicians/scientists we would be more likely to make statements that are actually true or show awareness as to how/why our statements may not exactly be true.

    The British Empire (as you may be aware) is responsible for death and destruction on a global scale, and many of their attempts to rule and partition land and peoples has lead to todays most prominent ongoing conflicts (e.g. in the middle east). Why would you make a blanket statement (just to boost your weak argument) that how the British treated people is not as bad as women in present-day Saudia Arabia? This sort of argument is imprecise and unmathematical. You can just say that women are treated badly in SA and give some examples, but your point is not made stronger by adding statements that are not true.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The British Empire (as you may be aware) is responsible for death and destruction on a global scale, and many of their attempts to rule and partition land and peoples has lead to todays most prominent ongoing conflicts (e.g. in the middle east).


    Maybe you mean British colonialism had far worse global consequences than Saudi oppression of women. Of course that's true, but that's a very different statement from "worse treatment of its subjects". In terms of worse treatment of its subjects (how they are treated as individuals, not whether colonial policy was good for their countries or the world in the long run), I stand by my original statement. The British treated colonial subjects, in most cases, much better than the Saudis treat women today. Of course there were exceptions, but I am unaware of any case in which for decades the British systematically treated 50+% of the population as poorly as women are currently treated in Saudia Arabia. Is that a sufficiently precise and mathematical statement?

    Why would you make a blanket statement (just to boost your weak argument) that how the British treated people is not as bad as women in present-day Saudia Arabia?

    I make statements because I believe they are true - why do you?

    This sort of argument is imprecise and unmathematical.


    Imprecise and unmathematical? Do you honestly believe anything in this entire comment thread could be described as precise and mathematical?

    I've been unable to resist posting this comment, but from this point on I'll refrain from commenting on this post. (Not out of fear that my weak arguments will be exposed, but because I foresee a flame war. I don't want to spend the time and I don't think it is on-topic here anyway.)

    ReplyDelete
  23. The British treated colonial subjects, in most cases, much better than the Saudis treat women today. Of course there were exceptions, but I am unaware of any case in which for decades the British systematically treated 50+% of the population as poorly as women are currently treated in Saudia Arabia.


    The British empire had a charming system of justice which included amongst other things blowing rebels by attaching them to the mouths of canons in order to make an example (read any history book on the the First War of Indian Independence (1857), imposing collective punishment by obiliterating entire villages (various Afghan Expeditionary Wars),
    destroying local industries by crippling
    (physically) skilled artisans in the colonies (textile industry in India). To compare such barbarity with the undoubted discrimination against women in Islamic countries is so amazingly ignorant -- that I suspect given the general educational levels of people who read this blog, that this attitude is coming from somewhere else.

    And as far as status of women coming from societies that people so love to criticize -- heres one who in my opinion might be well on her way to becoming the first female Field's medallist: check out the web page of
    Maryam Mirzakhani.

    ReplyDelete
  24. To compare such barbarity with the undoubted discrimination against women in Islamic countries is so amazingly ignorant

    Aha, I see the problem, so I guess I will comment one more time. You appear unaware that women are actually treated much worse in Saudia Arabia than in any other country. It's not an issue of Muslim vs. non-Muslim: plenty of Muslim countries find it perfectly compatible with their religion to give basic civil rights to women. Others don't, but Saudia Arabia is the worst.

    Women in Saudia Arabia can't legally meet or associate with unrelated men (and in practice will be severely punished if caught doing so), can't drive, must cover their entire body in public, can't open their own bank accounts independently of a man, can't study many fields, can't vote, can't testify in court (they can appear in court but their testimony is not considered legally reliable - this is critical in cases of violence against women), etc. And this is just counting legal restrictions, rather than all cultural practices.

    I would much rather have been in India under British rule, say, than be a woman in Saudia Arabia today. Sure, there were plenty of atrocities, particularly during wars, but despite your examples I still believe that life for most people most of the time was better under British rule than it is for women in Saudia Arabia. (Note that this is a very specific statement about Saudia Arabia.)

    that I suspect given the general educational levels of people who read this blog, that this attitude is coming from somewhere else

    Indeed, you caught me - I am actually an undercover agent on a crusade against the world's Muslims. As you suspected, no educated person could possibly disagree about these issues.

    And as far as status of women coming from societies that people so love to criticize

    Perhaps you haven't noticed that not only is Iran not Saudi Arabia, it isn't even terribly similar culturally: Persian vs. Arab. Iran's women's rights record certainly isn't great (the revolution was a huge setback for women), but Iran is no Saudi Arabia.

    I do agree that Mirzakhani is very impressive. I wish all countries could produce and nurture more researchers like her (male and female).

    ReplyDelete
  25. I would much rather have been in India under British rule, say, than be a woman in Saudia Arabia today.

    Oh really. You are aware of course that the life expectancy of pre-independence India was under thirty years -- so this question would have been moot in any case.

    In understand that conditions for women in Saudi Arabia are quite bad by contemporary standards. However, British colonialism (and imperalism in general) has been the greatest evil of the modern times and is unboubtedly the primary contradiction of our era.
    In any case this thread is diverging exponentially away from the original post -- so lets end it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. You are aware of course that the life expectancy of pre-independence India was under thirty years -- so this question would have been moot in any case.

    According to http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html, the life expectancy at birth of non-white males in the US in 1900-02 was 32.54. It's a disgustingly low figure and it demonstrates outrageous problems, but it's not unprecedented. :-( (For comparison, for white males it was 38.3 in 1850 and 48.23 in 1900-02.)

    However, British colonialism (and imperalism in general) has been the greatest evil of the modern times

    I'll grant you that it's among the top handful, and there have been some pretty terrible evils in the last century.

    In any case this thread is diverging exponentially away from the original post -- so lets end it.

    Like the imperfect Bayesians we are, we will agree to disagree. :-) Sadly (or perhaps happily?), I suspect we agree about 95% of what we are discussing, and are just very polarized about the remaining 5%.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Like the imperfect Bayesians we are, we will agree to disagree. :-) Sadly (or perhaps happily?), I suspect we agree about 95% of what we are discussing, and are just very polarized about the remaining 5%.

    Being ignorant about most things statistical, I do not quite understand the Bayesian ref. but I do agree with the 95% bit -- and what a drab world it would be if we weren't allowed to disagree on the remaining 5.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Lead image:(two choices)
    (http://www.cultureby.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/03/05/img_0307.jpg)
    or
    (http://neveryetmelted.com/wp-images/Antikythera20.jpg)

    So much of what I have seen since I have began studying computational complexity simply amazes me. I have come from an outsiders perspective peering into this vast new world where obvious things hide themselves and complex things take center stage to be studied like pellets of sand beneath a microscope. I will say this one thing: I have never been treated with more disdain in an academic setting. I have had M.I.T. (insert logo: http://web.mit.edu/graphicidentity/img/logo/mitlogo.gif) Assistant Professor Scott Aaronson threaten to contact my Internet Service Provider and call me a "goon" for disproving this theorem publicly. I have been called a "troll" and "couch boy" the latter I have no idea. I have had my I.P. address blocked from Wikipedia and have been sent threatening emails from Wikipedia administrators saying, "Wikipedia doesn't need you." Since I began pursuing my proof of computational complexity my Wikipedia profile for my work as a screenwriter (which had remained untouched for the better part of three years) was immediately flagged as "non-notable" and deleted. And all because the mathematics and code I was inputting was too advanced for wiki language to swallow without causing system problems and offending apparently some very sensitive people.
    - Hide quoted text -


    Basically, as the case may certainly be there seem to be a lot of people out there absolutely insistent that "P" does not equal "NP". But I have to wonder, if it is only theory we are debating here, what is so vested by this people that they defend an insistent of an impossibility as if it were the holy grail? It just does not make sense to me. I will say this, especially, it does not make sense to argue that something such as P equals NP has to be impossible. If it were true there are well documented articles such as this one in the Boston Globe (www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2009/02/09/great_unknowns/) which blatantly list all the potential benefits we might experience if the scientific community would accept P=NP. The list includes advances in "Protein Folding" which could spur unprecedented growth and advances and biological research which may well include cures for diseases like cancer and H.I.V. So dare I say, why are noted professors at top universities such as Scott Aaronson at M.I.T. and Stephen Arthur Cook at the University of Toronto so insistent of its impossibility? What could be so motivating as one would defend such a contrary position to which being contrariety holds no obvious benefit for society at large. The elephant in the room seems to be that this argument has been raging and churning for years ever since Stephen Cook invented the class "NP-Complete" back in 1970.

    My goal, my dream, in pursuing a proof that P=NP was not to win a million dollars and notoriety, but to help the people in the world use the technology to better take care of themselves and their families. My goals personally are to help my young niece who just had an implant put in her ear so she could hear better and to spur advances in cancer research as my uncle and Godfather was in the last month diagnosed with kidney and bone cancer. So still, I continue on, every morning pursuing the solution despite the animosity and ignorance.

    My dreams are simply bigger than theirs. My dreams are not to predict the S&P 500 and compromise the security of banks by collapsing known elements of cryptography. My dreams are that a young researcher in Tibet working by himself may uncover a cure for cancer that no one had seen. My goal is that a hobby mechanic in rural Russia with access to the Internet will invent a hybrid computer driven engine which will best all the struggling automakers who we continue to float financially like giant sick whales out to sea. My dream is that the academic community would allow open access to citizens at large and not simply the ones who can afford the prestigious school tuition. The basis of my plea: history has shown it to be the best path.

    With only three months of formal education he became one of the greatest inventors and industrial leaders in history. Edison obtained 1,093 United States patents, the most issued to any individual.

    (image: Thomas Edison's original patent for an "electric lamp". http://www.historicaldocuments.com/ThomasEdisonLightBulbPatent2.jpg)
    or
    (image: Thomas Edison. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals_iv/images/thomas_edison/thomas_edison.jpg)

    A Quote:

    "If smart people all had Ph.D.'s we would not have light bulbs." --Martin Musatov on Thomas Edison

    Call this my prayer or call it my plea it is my cry to the scientific community and to God in heaven can we please work together here and accomplish some good in the world instead of warbled disagreement? My last thought is to ask yourself why would anyone insist on the absolute impossibility of something that could bring so much good to the world?

    Quotes by Thomas Edison:(several of them but please include as many as possible as they all fit)

    "Hell, there are no rules here we're trying to accomplish something."- THOMAS EDISON

    "I didn't fail ten thousand times. I successfully eliminated, ten thousand times, materials and combinations which wouldn't work."

    "I never perfected an invention that I did not think about in terms of the service it might give others."

    "I am more of a sponge than an inventor. I absorb ideas from every source. My principal business is giving commercial value to the brilliant but misdirected ideas of others."

    "Time is really the only capital that any human being has, and the one thing that he can't afford to lose."

    "I find out what the world needs. Then I go ahead and try to invent it."

    "I have more respect for the fellow with a single idea who gets there than for the fellow with a thousand ideas who does nothing."

    "Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up."

    Thanks for reading this post. If you have any comments or suggestions please feel free to contact me through this website.

    You have to wonder with stories like these, could there be something more to this whole element that as to yet remains unseen.

    VAST SPY SYSTEM LOOTS COMPUTERS IN 103 COUNTRIES... (N.Y. Times, Front Page - tomorrow)
    Canadians find network... (AP News)


    My name is Martin Michael Musatov and these are all the things I have been able to do since I started my proof:

    1) I have been able to successfully publish documents and images on web servers run by the European Organization for Nuclear Research or Cern.

    -http://www.cern.ch
    -http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1164206/files/s1-ln5758210-9223534-1939656818Hwf-1468147288IdV-15212827115758210PDF_HI0001.pdf (Paper/experiment I conducted)
    -http://documents.cern.ch/photo/photo-tsic/icon-dfbx-2009-001.gif (image I uploaded as a documented Astro-particle physics experiment)
    -http://pisnpplus1.blogspot.com (blog I set up outlining my experience at CERN)

    2) I have been able to gather and reproduce several documents and demonstrations which prove the results found on this site: http://light-symmetry.blogspot.com and several other sites at http://www.newmedici.com and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5CRshmqvuA&feature=channel_page

    ReplyDelete
  29. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<====MARTIN MICHAEL MUSATOV==P=NP===========>>>
    The Angel and the Little Scroll
    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<====MARTIN MICHAEL MUSATOV==P=NP===========>>>

    ReplyDelete
  30. wow the M-Wave guy (#29 and 30) is almost as wordy as a Mr John Sidles...

    ReplyDelete
  31. M-Wave guy=Martin Michael Musatov

    ReplyDelete
  32. The Millennium prize problems are a shameless attempt by Clay to associate his name ... A quick Google search shows that while Jones makes quite a bit, ..... My name is Martin Michael Musatov and these are all the things I have .... Variance estimation, method of random groups, balanced half samples ...

    ReplyDelete