I tried to google it and it’s not super clear.

-Perelman gets his phd in russia super young and is hired at NYU/SUNY

-Publishes some groundbreaking stuff on arxiv (a free site to post white papers in math and physics) in 2002/2003

-There is some drama with another scientist who is known for stealing people’s work trying to downplay Perelman’s contribution

-Perelman quits his US jobs and returns to russia to work in math (making wayyyyyyy less money), then quits that job too and becomes a recluse

-Turns down fields medal and millennium prize (1M dollars for solving)

-Says some mathematicians are unethical but the rest of them tolerate it so they’re shit too so the whole thing is shit. Also says he doesn’t want to be put in a zoo or treated like a pet about it.

—

I’m going to go ahead and assume I don’t understand enough about being a math superstar to understand where he’s coming from, but he certainly sounds like a principled guy and now I respect him.

Not from that field, and I think it depends a lot of the field, country, etc, but research is not an idilic world at all and deal with huge flaws from the real world, institutions, society and economics, not aside of human being's flaws, so it can be deeply disappointing in some aspects. I believe is a natural in any guild (there is shit everywhere, e.g. police require internal affairs for a good reason, but not only, they suffer from funding restrictions, metrics for promotion, etc, and the same can be said for medicine, politics, etc) so in the end it may be your ability to deal with real world shit... and luck.

Just speculating, maybe it has to do with belonging to Russian academia.

Keep reading. It's in the "Possible withdrawal from mathematics" section.

A million dollars buys a lot of food and shelter which gives you more time to do mushroom picking. And the process of accepting the prize probably wouldn't have taken more than a couple of days

2D: If you draw a perhaps wobbly circle shape (loop) on the ground, it has an inside that you can colour in. If your loop is elastic, it can contract to be all in a tiny heap. Topologists call this "simply connected".

3D: The water on your bath is also simply connected. Your elastic loop, whatever its shape, can shrink back down to tiny.

2D: The surface of your tennis ball is simply connected because any elastic loop on its surface can shrink to nothing, but the surface of your ring donut isn't, because you could cut your elastic and wrap it arround the donut and it couldn't shrink because the donut would stop it. Ants living on the surface of the donut might not immediately realise it wasn't simply connected because they'd never drawn a big enough loop to find out that it couldn't be shrunk.

3D: The solid donut is also not simply connected, because the ring could contain an elastic band that goes all the way around the ring and back to the start, and it couldn't shrink to nothing because it would have to leave the donut.

2-Manifolds: a 2-manifold is some kind of surface that doesn't have an edge and when you look up close it looks like it's flat-ish. You could make it by sticking lots of tiny sheets of rubber flat to each other but there's not allowed to be an edge. The simplest 2-manifolds are an infinite plane, the surface of a ball and the surface of a donut. The small ones are called closed. The technical reason for that is to do with not having any edges but still being finite, but you can think of closed to mean finite.

Manifolds may not be as the srrm: If you live in a 2-manifold you might not immediately realise that it's ball surface and you might not realise it's a donut surface. If you have a computer game from yesteryear where when you go off the top of the screen you come back on at the same angle and position on the bottom of the screen, and the same for left and right, that's actually got the same layout as the surface of a donut. To help you see that, imagine your screen was triple widescreen and made of rubber. Roll it up to glue the top to the bottom and then glue the two ends of the tube to each other. You haven't changed the game play at all but now you can see it's the surface of a donut shape.

3-manifolds: anything that looks like 3D space up close is a 3-manifold. The simplest 3-manifolds are an ordinary infinite 3D space, a 3-sphere, which is like the 3D version of the surface of a ball, but it's hard to imagine the 4D ball it's wrapped around, and the 3D version of the computer game.

The universe: It looks simply connected, but we can't see that directly, because maybe there's a very long loop we haven't gone on yet that gets back where you started without being shrinkable. This is hard to imagine, but it could be like being in the 3D version of the computer game where there's a long loop that can't shrink because it goes through one side of the screen and comes out the other before coming back. It can't be shrink at all, especially not to nothing. The universe is a 3-manifold.

The Poincare conjecture says that every simply connected "closed" (finite) 3-manifold is essentially the same as the 3-sphere. If ALL your loops shrink, no matter how big, and the universe is finite and has no end wall, then it's the 3 sphere.

Mathematicians have been trying to prove that it's true for a long long time, and there was a 1M USD prize for proving it that this guy turned down. The prize was largely unnecessary because lots of mathematicians were trying to prove it anyway because it's so famous and enticing.

I was very active from around 2003-2009, and I agree. I haven't been there in a loooong time but I imagine it’s absolutely terrible now.

Lower Bound on the Length of the Shortest Superpermutation aka "The Haruhi Problem" by Anonymous

Video explaining the problem and solution

tl;dr if you have the numbers 1 and 2 you can make two permutations with them: 12 and 21. You can also make a "Superpermutation" with something like 1221 which is a sequence that contains all permutations of 1 and 2. A shorter sequence would be 121 or 212. Finding the shortest sequence that contains all permutations of any given set of numbers was an unsolved math problem. Someone posted on 4chan's anime board asking for the most efficient way to watch every permutation of "the endless 8", which are 8 nearly identical epsiodes of The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya. Anime nerds pride themselves on watching these episodes over and over. Someone posted a sequence with a math proof for why it is the shortest. In essence, they posted the shortest superpermutation for a set of 8. The method can be used on any sized set and doesn't just apply to sets of 8.

4chan anon who made significant contribution to a math problem in order to find the best way to watch an anime

Looks like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpermutation based on the content of the wikipedia article

I’d also love to see this.

Lower bounds of superpermutations on this wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpermutation

https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/24/18019464/4chan-anon-anime-haruhi-math-mystery

shout out to pumpkin escobar and the local 305