most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net 2013-06-19T18:31:56Z http://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/50826 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdf http://mathoverflow.net/questions/50826/new-years-predictions-in-mathematics Joseph O'Rourke 2010-12-31T19:39:50Z 2010-12-31T19:53:50Z

<p>It is the time of year for predictions: predictions for 2011, predictions for the next decade, predictions for the unspecified future. I searched a bit for predictions in mathematics, but it seems mathematicians are too wise to engage in this dubious activity. I found only two predictions:</p> <p>(1) Two <em>New Scientist</em> writers, Samuel Arbesman and Rachel Courtland, <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20827923.700" rel="nofollow">predict that 2011 will <em>not</em> see the $P=NP$ problem resolved</a>.</p> <p>(2) Sir Michael Atiyah</p> <blockquote> <p>suggested that the conjectured self-adjoint operator that could explain the Riemann hypothesis might be the Hamiltonian of quantum gravity</p> </blockquote> <p>in a November talk at the <a href="http://www.scgp.stonybrook.edu/" rel="nofollow">Simons Center</a>, as <a href="http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=3247" rel="nofollow">reported by Peter Woit</a>.</p> <p>Of course it is a stretch to call Atiyah's suggestion a "prediction." And every conjecture in mathematics is a prediction! Nevertheless, in the spirit of New Year's, I would be interested to hear any predictions on future developments in mathematics.</p>

http://mathoverflow.net/questions/50826/new-years-predictions-in-mathematics/50827#50827 Jason 2010-12-31T19:53:50Z 2010-12-31T19:53:50Z

<p>I've heard this type of prediction made:</p> <p>In a few decades or so, the negation of the continuum hypothesis will be accepted as a consequence of some "obvious" axiom added to ZFC just as choice was added to ZF as an obvious axiom.</p>