Morgan 1969年在Rice University 获得PhD, 在数学界已经混了将近40年了还没作出过什么象样的工作, 是丘先生看不起的那种数学不行专搞政治的小人. 大家在网上很容易找到他的CV （http://www.ims.cuhk.edu.hk/talkwithmasters/jmorgan_cv.pdf）. 此人最大的荣耀也只是在1986年的ICM上作过45分钟报告, 还是占了那年ICM在美国加州Berkeley 东道国的便宜. 此人已快到退休的年龄, 还没混到美国国家科学院院士. 查一下美国国家科学院的网页 （http://www.nasonline.org）, 很容易知道美国国家科学院共有116位数学院士. Morgan充其量只能算是一个二流数学家, 甚至三流. 但此人虽然搞数学不行, 搞政治可算得上一流. 对同系的美国国家科学院院士, Ricci 流的创始人, 不搞政治的Hamilton 极为嫉妒, 极力打压. 最近纽约客论坛上的2个贴子说得一针见血
http://www.popyard.com/cgi-mod/post.cgi?forum=1&page=1&num=26522&r=0
http://www.popyard.com/cgi-mod/post.cgi?cate=1&page=1&num=26433&r=
最近纽约客论坛上的另一个贴子也很值得注意
http://boards.newyorker.com/thread.jspa?threadID=760&tstart=0
There is an allegation that the IMU requested local organizers to distribute photocopies of the New Yorker article at the ICM and/or satellite conferences. This allegation, if proven, would represent a gross misuse of the IMU offices. It also violates people’s sense of fairness: No rebuttal from Yau and others who were accused of unethical conducts was seen accompanying the New Yorker article. For the first time in the history, the ICM was used as a bully pulpit for personal vendettas against its members based on an article that was discredited by several mathematicians quoted therein.
In our gadarene rush to stone the demon, we have lost our sense and sensibility. When does the Chinese media decide who contribute what in mathematics? When does the New Yorker become a place to resolve professional and academic grievance? When does a mathematical conference become a place to trade innuendoes and tabloids?
For many, the ICM 2006 would be remembered as the event where the Poincaré conjecture was finally declared solved. For some, it would be remembered as the new Spanish Inquisition led by Ms. Nasar---an author who has not been shy from promoting anti-Chinese bigotry---to witch hunt Professor Yau and other mathematicians of Chinese heritage
幕后黑手是谁, 很容易调查清楚. 总会有知情的人会捅出来的. 真相一定会大白于天下. 如果Morgan被揭露出来是背后黑手, 一点也不会令人感到奇怪. John Ball 和 Phillip Griffiths 也是重大嫌疑犯. 不过Ball和Griffiths是搞政治的超一流人物, 虽然数学也不行, 不至于犯这种低级错误, 让人很容易抓住把柄.
Nasar 幕后黑手是谁, 数学圈内人士都心知肚明. 很可能是一个重量级人物但却没在Nasar文中留下痕迹. 此人是谁 ? 黑手极可能是Milnor. 此人是重大嫌疑犯. Milnor的”猴子的扳手”一说在先, Nasar 一文在后, 却只字不Milnor, 也不提”猴子的扳手”一说. 奇怪吗? 一点也不奇怪.
我们拭目以待, 真相总会大白于天下.
评论 (0)