Comment Most Serious Claims Against Prof. Yau. (Score 1) 212
Let us not lose sight of one of the most important claims made against Prof Yau by the New Yorker investigative report at issue.
True or false, did Yau publish the Cao and Zhu paper WITHOUT peer review? Considering Yau has such a personal interest in this topic and Cau was reportedly his phd student, we deserve an answer. Have any editorial members publicly refuted the New Yorker article's claim that;
"On April 13th of this year, the thirty-one mathematicians on the editorial board of the Asian Journal of Mathematics received a brief e-mail from Yau and the journal's co-editor informing them that they had three days to comment on a paper by Xi-Ping Zhu and Huai-Dong Cao titled "The Hamilton-Perelman Theory of Ricci Flow: The Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures," which Yau planned to publish in the journal. The e-mail did not include a copy of the paper, reports from referees, or an abstract. At least one board member asked to see the paper but was told that it was not available." (New Yorker, Nasser, Gruber).
2. Did the title of Cao and Zhu's manuscript really change at the last moment?
The New Yorker article claims the title was changed from:
"The Hamilton-Perelman Theory of Ricci Flow: The Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures"
to
"Complete Proof of the Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures - Application of the Hamilton-Perelman theory of the Ricci flow."
If the above is true, then Prof Yau has some explaining to do!
True or false, did Yau publish the Cao and Zhu paper WITHOUT peer review? Considering Yau has such a personal interest in this topic and Cau was reportedly his phd student, we deserve an answer. Have any editorial members publicly refuted the New Yorker article's claim that;
"On April 13th of this year, the thirty-one mathematicians on the editorial board of the Asian Journal of Mathematics received a brief e-mail from Yau and the journal's co-editor informing them that they had three days to comment on a paper by Xi-Ping Zhu and Huai-Dong Cao titled "The Hamilton-Perelman Theory of Ricci Flow: The Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures," which Yau planned to publish in the journal. The e-mail did not include a copy of the paper, reports from referees, or an abstract. At least one board member asked to see the paper but was told that it was not available." (New Yorker, Nasser, Gruber).
2. Did the title of Cao and Zhu's manuscript really change at the last moment?
The New Yorker article claims the title was changed from:
"The Hamilton-Perelman Theory of Ricci Flow: The Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures"
to
"Complete Proof of the Poincaré and Geometrization Conjectures - Application of the Hamilton-Perelman theory of the Ricci flow."
If the above is true, then Prof Yau has some explaining to do!
