Famous Errors?

The discussion about Goedel’s theorem made me wonder about this question: when was the last time a widely quoted mathematical result turned out to be false? I’ve seen preprints that had proofs I didn’t believe, and I know that journals occasionally print results that are wrong, but does anyone know of a result that was once widely accepted, but then turned out to be wrong?

Goedel’s Theorem is True

I’m sorry if my last post misled anyone. Goedel’s theorem is true. Lots of people have checked the proof. I’ve checked the proof. There are multiple proofs (the usual proof is Rosser’s, not Goedel’s original proof), as well as vast generalizations.

Here’s a two line proof of the theorem (some details are left out):

  • If Goedel’s theorem is false, then the Halting Problem for Turing machines is solvable.
  • The Halting Problem is unsolvable, therefore Goedel’s theorem is true.

At the time, Goedel’s result was very surprising, but by modern standards it’s almost obvious. The set of provable theorems of arithmetic is recursively enumerable. It’s not that surprising that first-order arithmetic would be at least as expressive as Turing machines, which implies that the set of provable theorems is not recursive. Goedel’s theorem follows.

I intended the post to be tongue-in-cheek. My real point was that a certain number of papers on Arxiv are apparently written by cranks.

Nobel Prize in Economics

The (sort-of) Nobel Prize in Economics has been announced. The contributions of one of the two, Robert Aumann, are almost purely mathematical work in game theory.

His most interesting idea is that of correlated equilibria. The usual definition of equilibrium in a non-cooperative game, Nash equilibrium, rules out certain kinds of cooperation, even when that cooperation is in the self-interest of each player. Correlated equilibria allow randomized strategies which rely on a random event that is known to both players. Some details about correlated equilibria can be found
here.

(As an aside, the Wikipedia entry for Aumann is unusually bad, so it’s a good candidate for updating, if anyone’s interested. There’s also no entry for correlated equilibrium.)

November Notices of the AMS

The November issue of the Notices of the AMS is available.

Some highlights: