Over the last several years my work has focused primarily on the Langlands Program a web of very influential conjectures linking number theory, algebraic geometry and the theory of automorphic forms. I am trying to develop arithmetic techniques that will, I hope, help to resolve some of the fundamental questions in this field. I am delighted to be appointed a Royal Society Research Professor in their anniversary year and I look forward to the opportunities this will give me to further my research.
About
Quantum Theory, Groups and Representations
Not Even Wrong: The Book
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 663 other subscribersRecent Comments
- The Situation at Columbia III 76
Dave, Dave, Peter Woit, Dave, Peter Woit, Dave [...] - The Situation at Columbia 27
Peter Woit, Chris O'Brien, zzz, Peter Woit, Doug McDonald, Douglas Natelson [...] - The Situation at Columbia II 13
Peter Shor, Peter Woit, Attendee, Peter Woit, Ian, Doug McDonald [...] - Back to Math and Physics 1
anon - ICM 2026 14
Peter Woit, German_physicist, epsilondelta, Tim Böttcher, John Baez, Paolo Bertozzini [...]
- The Situation at Columbia III 76
Categories
- abc Conjecture (21)
- Book Reviews (123)
- BRST (13)
- Euclidean Twistor Unification (16)
- Experimental HEP News (153)
- Fake Physics (8)
- Favorite Old Posts (50)
- Film Reviews (15)
- Langlands (52)
- Multiverse Mania (163)
- Not Even Wrong: The Book (27)
- Obituaries (35)
- Quantum Mechanics (24)
- Quantum Theory: The Book (7)
- Strings 2XXX (28)
- Swampland (20)
- The Situation at Columbia (4)
- This Week's Hype (143)
- Uncategorized (1,300)
- Wormhole Publicity Stunts (15)
Archives
Links
Mathematics Weblogs
- Alex Youcis
- Alexandre Borovik
- Anton Hilado
- Cathy O'Neil
- Daniel Litt
- David Hansen
- David Mumford
- David Roberts
- Emmanuel Kowalski
- Harald Helfgott
- Jesse Johnson
- Johan deJong
- Lieven Le Bruyn
- Mathematics Without Apologies
- Noncommutative Geometry
- Persiflage
- Pieter Belmans
- Qiaochu Yuan
- Quomodocumque
- Secret Blogging Seminar
- Silicon Reckoner
- Terence Tao
- The n-Category Cafe
- Timothy Gowers
- Xena Project
Physics Weblogs
- Alexey Petrov
- AMVA4NewPhysics
- Angry Physicist
- Capitalist Imperialist Pig
- Chad Orzel
- Clifford Johnson
- Cormac O’Raifeartaigh
- Doug Natelson
- EPMG Blog
- Geoffrey Dixon
- Georg von Hippel
- Jacques Distler
- Jess Riedel
- Jim Baggott
- John Horgan
- Lubos Motl
- Mark Goodsell
- Mark Hanman
- Mateus Araujo
- Matt Strassler
- Matt von Hippel
- Matthew Buckley
- Peter Orland
- Physics World
- Resonaances
- Robert Helling
- Ross McKenzie
- Sabine Hossenfelder
- Scott Aaronson
- Sean Carroll
- Shaun Hotchkiss
- Stacy McGaugh
- Tommaso Dorigo
Some Web Pages
- Alain Connes
- Arthur Jaffe
- Barry Mazur
- Brian Conrad
- Brian Hall
- Cumrun Vafa
- Dan Freed
- Daniel Bump
- David Ben-Zvi
- David Nadler
- David Vogan
- Dennis Gaitsgory
- Eckhard Meinrenken
- Edward Frenkel
- Frank Wilczek
- Gerard ’t Hooft
- Greg Moore
- Hirosi Ooguri
- Ivan Fesenko
- Jacob Lurie
- John Baez
- José Figueroa-O'Farrill
- Klaas Landsman
- Laurent Fargues
- Laurent Lafforgue
- Nolan Wallach
- Peter Teichner
- Robert Langlands
- Vincent Lafforgue
Twitter
Videos
I see that slides can be downloaded for 3 out of the 18 talks given at the Group Representations conference you attended at Yale.
http://www.liegroups.org/zuckerman/slides.html
In particular Garrett Lisi’s talk is one of those for which the slides are available.
Unfortunately I couldn’t be there for my advisor’s conference. Unemployment is a harsh and forbidding landscape.
J.A. I’ve read your blog and some of the comments re the current math job market. Sounds very tough–as if they are almost forcing pure math PhD’s to go back for applied courses of some type. Sad you were unable to attend your advisor’s 60th-birthday conference. Hope things improve soon.
I am going to order that Perelman book right away!
The anniversary of the Riemannian hypothesis should be celebrated with a lecture by Allain Connes in Göttingen, but it semms neither Connes nor Göttingen is involved in this? Too bad.
Just re-read Riemanns original paper (in Edwards, “H. M. Riemann’s Zeta Function”). As you all probably know already, what is called “Riemannian hypothesis” is only a remark in the paper, which is about the “number of primes less than a given magnitude”. At the end of the paper Riemann compares his formula with the known number of primes smaller than 3 million! referencing the work of Gauss and Goldschmidt. Wow, they computed all primes lower than 3 million without a computer! (And he mentions that he himself tried to prove his hypothesis: “One would of course like to have a rigorous proof of this, but I have put aside the search for such a proof after some fleeting vain attemps, because it is not necessary for the immediate objective of my investigation”. What would he have said if someone had told him that this would become one of the most popular open problems of the 21st century?).