Chen Jingrun, 1933, a native of Cangshan District, Fuzhou City, Fujian Province, is a famous expert in analytic number theory in China. 1973 published the paper "Representing a big even number as the sum of the products of a prime number and no more than two prime numbers" in China Science, which is 1+2 in Goldbach's conjecture proof. This work was immediately recognized internationally, and this achievement was called Chen Theorem internationally. Mr Chen Jingrun was also invited to give a 45-minute speech at the International Congress of Mathematicians, although he was unable to make it.

If we want to say whether we can win the Nobel Prize, that is, the Fields Prize, let's look at the conditions in Chen Jingrun. 1973. Chen Jingrun was just 40 years old when he published his achievements, which is the bottom line of the age of the winners of the Fields Medal, and Chen Jingrun meets the requirements. Let's analyze the importance of Chen Jingrun's works again. First of all, Chen Jingrun's method is not original, but has existed since ancient times. In the 20th century, people reformed the screening method rapidly, which made it shine on the issue of prime numbers. In fact, the weighted screening method used by Chen Jingrun is not his original creation, but has undergone a certain degree of transformation. It is in this way that he achieved what others failed to achieve, and went further, from 1+5, 1+4, and finally reached 1+2, only one step away from the final solution.

Some people say that Chen Jingrun didn't finally solve Goldbach's conjecture, so he shouldn't be eligible for the prize. Having said that, let's look at the proof of another major conjecture, that is, as long as we push one step further, the achievement will win a Fields Prize. This is the proof process of Poincare conjecture.

1904, after Poincare conjecture was put forward, there was no substantial proof and progress in the past 50 years. So some people put forward a way to prove the curve, first try whether the higher-dimensional guess is correct, and then push it forward layer by layer.

196 1 year, Steven Smale, an American mathematician, used a very clever method to bypass the difficulties of three-dimensional and four-dimensional, proved the Poincare conjecture with more than five dimensions, and won the Fields Prize of 1966. 198 1 year, American mathematician michael freedman proved the four-dimensional conjecture and won the 1983 Fields Prize. Of course, perelman, the Russian madman who finally solved this problem, also deserved the Fields Prize, but he didn't go.

However, compared with Poincare conjecture, Goldbach conjecture has much less influence, and these winners who have achieved phased results have put forward new methods to solve the problem. Although their work has not reached the ultimate goal, it still does not affect the greatness of their work.

In contrast, Chen Jingrun's grades are much more depressing. He didn't put forward new mathematical techniques, but searched up and down on a less important problem. It is not that this spirit is not worth advocating, but the significance of these works is obviously not important to the mathematicians who proved Poincare's conjecture. Even if someone in the world notices whether Chen Jingrun's works deserve the Fields Prize, I'm afraid the final winner will not be him.

No

Chen Jingrun is great.

But his greatness lies not in science, but in the environment at that time. In the academic environment like China at that time, it was not easy to achieve such achievements.

Chen Jingrun is an outstanding mathematician, but his achievements are only second-rate, not first-rate.

First, he did not prove Goldbach's conjecture, but only proved that it reached 1+2.

Second, he didn't create any mathematical disciplines or tools, but he applied the screening method to the extreme.

The ranking of authoritative mathematicians in Chen Jingrun is about 65,438+0,000, which is certainly a great achievement.

In contrast, Chen Shengshen is about 30, and Qiu Chengtong is about 100.

Chen Jingrun can't win the Nobel Prize, because the modern mathematical circle has admitted that Goldbach conjecture doesn't exist, and it is just an inherent characteristic of an arbitrary even number.

Goldbach's conjecture is that any even number greater than 2 can be expressed as the sum of two prime numbers, such as 4 equals 2 plus 2, 6 equals 3 plus 3, 8 equals 3 plus 5, 1O equals 3 plus 7, or 5 plus 5, 12 equals 5 plus 7, 14 equals 3 plus 165438+. Or 5 plus 1 1, ... 30 equals 13 plus 17, or1plus 19, or 7 plus 23. The greater the .................................................................................... even number, the greater the sum of two prime numbers.

For hundreds of years, many people have tried to prove this conjecture, some of them are said to have proved part of it, but the final proof has not yet come out, but the modern mathematics community has determined that this conjecture is established and there is no proof! It's like everyone has two hands and each hand has five fingers. Can you prove it? Everyone's previous proof is invalid!

According to the logic of Kochi's conjecture, I can also make a conjecture: any even number greater than 2 can be expressed as the sum of two even numbers. Does it make sense? Is there any evidence?

Will win the prize. I saw someone say that 1+2 is not important enough. I think the importance may change. Maybe one day someone will be inspired by this and finally prove Goldbach's conjecture. As long as 1+ 1 is not proved, this possibility always exists. Some people say that Chen Jingrun has not developed a new mathematical theory. But in fact, Poincare conjecture finally proved that the basic work was Ruqi flow, which was an earlier achievement, but the Fields Prize was awarded to the Russian god. And the foundation of proving Fermat's last theorem is algebraic geometry. Wiles's contribution to the Foundation is not outstanding. He kicked the door open and the Fields Prize was immediately awarded. There are many such examples. In order to solve a mathematical problem, mathematicians developed some theories, but it was another person who finally made a breakthrough. Chen Jingrun didn't win the Fields Prize, which shows that the mathematical community thinks that there are more important people and things worth rewarding. After all, this award is given every four years, and there are too few winners. But there are many Nobel Prizes, once a year, which can make more people win prizes. I think Chen Jingrun should be among the winners.

In fact, you don't need to look at the Nobel Prize, just look at whether you have won the Fields Medal. The Fields Medal is known as the Nobel Prize in mathematics, which is the highest honor you can get in the field of mathematics, but you must be under 40 before the New Year's Day of the year when the results are published, which is a bit pitted. Chen Jingrun was born in 1933, and 1973 published a detailed proof of Goldbach's conjecture to 1+2. There is also a very authoritative award, the Abel Prize named after the talented mathematician Abel. This is a very young award, and the prize money is quite large, similar to the Nobel Prize, but really too young. The award was first awarded in 2003. . Mr. Chen died on 1996. .

One of the reasons for the establishment of these two awards is said to be that the Nobel Prize has no share in the field of mathematics. With these two prizes, you don't have to bear the Nobel Prize in mathematics. Personally, I think Chen Jingrun should be able to win Fields or Abel on this score alone, but it's just a bit untimely.

Xu Chi's reportage "Goldbach Conjecture" brought this unknown and introverted mathematician into the field of vision of ordinary people and became an example in the early days of reform and opening up in the last century.

I think Chen Jingrun's social influence in China at that time may be more valuable than his contribution in the field of mathematics. Of course, Chen Jingrun's work promoted the research and development of mathematics!

Chen Jingrun's social value is to let us know intellectuals again and respect science and scientists more!

With regard to the contribution to mathematics, Chen Jingrun should only take Goldbach's conjecture a big step forward, and there is no great innovation in methods, only Chen Jingrun's strong perseverance can do it! Therefore, I think if there is a Nobel Prize in Mathematics, he may not win it!

Some people say that his prime number "1+2" is close to Goldbach's conjecture, and I say: nonsense! What is near? I want to meet two conditions! First, "1+9", "1+8" ... "1+2" must be related! That is to say, "1+8" is based on "1+9" and "1+2" is based on "1+3"! Second, Goldbach's conjecture is a true proposition, and finally it must be deduced from Chen Jingrun's prime number "1+2"! ! ! Obviously, these two conditions are not available! So Chen's prime number "1+2" is close to Goldbach's conjecture, which is sheer nonsense! "1+2", "1+3" and all "x+x" are the same and equidistant from Goldbach's conjecture! And it's thousands of miles away! The most important thing is that these are useless! ! ! What number theory needs is to finally prove Goldbach conjecture! ! ! So, Chen Jingrun contributed several sacks of useless draft paper! ! !

If there is a mathematics prize in the Nobel Prize, her selection method and purpose should be basically the same as the Nobel Prize in Natural Science, and the winner can make a groundbreaking and far-reaching contribution in this field. Chen Jingrun's works can be viewed according to similar standards.

Chen Jingrun devoted almost all his life to the proof of Goldbach's conjecture, and he made the latest achievement in the proof of Goldbach's conjecture-a big even number can be expressed as the sum of the products of a prime number and no more than two prime numbers, and this achievement is called 1+2 for short.

Chen Jingrun proved that the process of 1+2 used screening method, which was not invented by Chen Jingrun. Before him, some mathematicians tried to prove Goldbach's conjecture in this way and achieved some results. Although they didn't go as far as Chen Jingrun on this road, they didn't prove or deny Goldbach's conjecture as much as Chen Jingrun did in essence.

Screening method has a long history, it is said that it has a history of more than two thousand years. This has a great influence. If Chen Jingrun invented the sieving method, he could win the highest prize in mathematics, but he was only a user of this method.

If Chen Jingrun thoroughly proves Goldbach's conjecture, he can also win the highest prize in mathematics. You can refer to wiles, who proved Fermat's last theorem. When he proved Fermat's Last Theorem, he was 4 1 year old, which exceeded the age limit of 40 years, the highest prize in mathematics. But in 1998, the International Congress of Mathematicians made an exception and awarded him a silver medal. In 2065,438+06, wiles also won the Abel Prize. These two prizes can be counted as the two most important prizes in mathematics.

Chen Jingrun proved that 1+2 was only 33 years old, which did not exceed the upper limit of 40 years for the Fields Medal. There may be many reasons why he didn't win the Fields Medal, but one of the most important reasons is that his achievements can't reach the height of the Fields Medal.

Chen Jingrun is a man of the times, and his fame can not be separated from the continuous reports of the media at that time. In the era of establishing scientific models, he is widely publicized as a benchmark, but he is still a long way from the mathematics prize, just like he is 1+ 1.

There is no Nobel Prize in mathematics, but there is a Fields Prize, but I didn't get it because there are still some gaps.

Chen Jingrun is a famous mathematician in China. 1973 published a paper entitled "Representing a big even number as the sum of the products of a prime number and no more than two prime numbers". This paper is about Goldbach's conjecture, and he proved 1+2. This achievement is also called Chen Theorem.

In fact, there is a Fields Prize similar to the Nobel Prize in Mathematics, except that Chen Jingrun didn't win the Fields Prize. I think there are several main reasons:

1, he didn't complete the proof of Goldbach's conjecture. To put it bluntly, he just brought mankind one step closer to proving this conjecture.

2. The process of proof uses the weighted screening method, which is not a new method, let alone his originality. He just made a little change in the original method. Therefore, it can be concluded that he didn't invent new mathematical tools.

3. Goldbach conjecture is not the most valuable or important problem in mathematics.

If there is a Nobel Prize in mathematics, will Chen Can Jingrun win the Nobel Prize? Some people say yes, others say no. According to me, that is absolutely possible!

Chen Jingrun became a world-famous scientist because he proved 1+2 in Goldbach's conjecture. At that time, Chen Jingrun's proof process was written into the number theory textbooks of many countries, and was called "Chen Theorem" by German mathematician Li Xite and British mathematician Haberstein. Chen Jingrun's contribution to Goldbach's conjecture is undoubtedly enormous, but despite this, he didn't win the Fields Prize in mathematics. I don't think it was Chen Jingrun's lack of achievements, but the western society at that time was generally biased against China. If a China person wants to win the Western Science Prize, he must undoubtedly be bigger and more powerful than westerners. In the final analysis, I think it was the western society at that time that didn't recognize China scientists.

In fact, people studying abroad should have this experience. In the last century, some foreign academic circles rejected domestic scientists. The academic treatment of China scientists working abroad is often not guaranteed or even excluded. I think Shi and Rao Yi have a deep understanding of this. They have been working hard to improve the status of China scientists in foreign academic circles. In view of the situation at that time, I think Chen Jingrun's contribution and achievements are enormous, but he didn't get the honor he deserved.

On the other hand, if Chen Jingrun is a westerner, I think Chen Jingrun will definitely win the prize. Similarly, the Nobel Prize is the same. Where there are people, there are rivers and lakes, and the Nobel Prize Selection Committee is a good bird. For example, didn't the Nobel Peace Prize go to Obama? This is simply a naked face! Wu Jianxiong proved that parity is not conserved through experiments. Why can't he be awarded the Nobel Prize? In the final analysis, it is because of a kind of disapproval of scientists in China! Why didn't Tesla accept the Nobel Prize nomination? Because he knew that the Nobel Prize was not as clean as it was said. After all, the previous Nobel Prize was a game played by westerners, and no matter how high the academic achievements were, you couldn't get it.

Furthermore, let China people judge the Nobel Prize. I think both Chen Jingrun and Wu Jianxiong can win the Nobel Prize, but Obama will never win the Nobel Prize.