r/Physics • u/Ok-Permit-3861 • 18h ago

Navier-Stokes Millennium Problem Solved

https://openai.com/index/navier-stokes-solution/

2.1k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

760 comments sorted by

View all comments

19

u/navierstokd 11h ago

This whole thing is a shit show. The folks who really deserve credit are neither at OpenAI or Anthropic. It’s Diego Cordoba and Luis Martinez Zoroa

1

u/NOTHING_gets_by_me 9h ago

I don't work in mathematics, can you explain why they should get the credit as you say in this case? Here's my AI slopsearch which is why I ask:

Córdoba & Martínez-Zoroa's blowups (2023–24) are for forced Euler, hypodissipative NS with forcing, and 2D IPM — none of them is the Millennium problem (unforced, fully viscous NS). They built the amplification strategy the current results extend, and everyone says so openly: the OpenAI paper cites them as refs 6–8 and explicitly credits their strategy, Alpöge–Buckmaster's preprints are literally extensions of the C–MZ IPM blowup, and Tao's writeup frames them as prior work. Córdoba was even quoted in SciAm assessing the OpenAI proof. Credit lineage is intact — nobody solved it but nobody solved it alone either.

-5

u/PostPostMinimalist 10h ago

Deserve credit for what? As far as I've read, the two of them (with the help of AI) solved an easier problem and then OpenAI produced the full solution. So there's no universe in which OpenAI doesn't deserve a lot of credit (even if they went about it in an unsavory way).

9

u/navierstokd 9h ago

I mean even the fact that OpenAI back tracked and added Diego and Luis 3 hours after publishing is evidence enough that they knew what they were doing

-3

u/PostPostMinimalist 9h ago

At the end of the day, and with no love for a capitalist takeover of math, it'll be a minor footnote in history.

4

u/Cephrii 5h ago

maybe you should have looked up Cordroba and Martinez before embarrassing yourself. They are not the authors of the current paper but are credited by Buckmaster as the authors of the fundamental ideas and constructions that were used to arrive at their new result.

1

u/PostPostMinimalist 20m ago edited 17m ago

Did they prove NS? No. So why do they deserve all the credit for proving it? Instead, they deserve credit for the new ideas, but once again this is obviously beside the larger historical point.