
A Long-Sought Proof, Found and Almost Lost (2017) - taytus
https://www.quantamagazine.org/statistician-proves-gaussian-correlation-inequality-20170328
======
danbruc
Previous discussion [1], 71 comments.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13977554](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13977554)

------
xyzzyz
> With this red flag emblazoned on it, the proof continued to be ignored.
> Finally, in December 2015, the Polish mathematician Rafał Latała and his
> student Dariusz Matlak put out a paper advertising Royen’s proof,
> reorganizing it in a way some people found easier to follow.

I studied Probability Theory under prof. dr hab. Rafał Latała. He is a great
researcher and amazing teacher.

------
Cyph0n
This was an amazing read!

Decades were spent applying exceedingly complex mathematical techniques, but
in the end, the proof involved relatively rudimentary knowledge. And to top it
all off, Royen submitted his proof to some unknown journal in India and called
it a day!

------
danharaj
I'm glad quanta touched on the fact that people still want a more geometric
proof. In general the technique of a proof is as important as the statement
with regards to mathematical impact, perhaps even more.

------
claar
The wikipedia diagram at
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_correlation_inequalit...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_correlation_inequality)
helps gain an intuition for the Gaussian correlation inequality. The diagram
shows a circle and a rectangle centered on the origin.

The number of random dart throws in the intersection of the shapes is greater
than or equal to the number in either individual shape.

Well, sort of. The wikipedia page says "the proportion of the darts landing in
the intersection of both shapes is no less than the product of the proportions
of the darts landing in each shape."

~~~
incompatible
That Wikipedia article wasn't even created until shortly after the Quanta
magazine article was published.

------
mabbo
Stories like this always remind me of how much we as a society love the story
of unexpected loners figuring out the secret. There's nothing wrong with that,
but there also some wonderful breakthroughs being made by groups of people
working together.

I'd love to see a film about someone like Terrence Tao, a man best known for
all the breakthroughs coming from collaborations.

------
sn41
I wonder about the "red flag" discussed in the article. Can't editors submit
articles to journals with them on the editorial board? I'd think that it is
valid to submit to other editors.

~~~
Someone
Readers of the paper can’t know who handled the submission.

Even if that were published, there still would be the suspicion that other
editors wouldn’t want to reject a paper from someone they work with (this may
be a fairly loose ‘work with’ for editors of a,journal, but again, whose to
know?)

------
J5892
Non-AMP link: [https://www.wired.com/2017/04/elusive-math-proof-found-
almos...](https://www.wired.com/2017/04/elusive-math-proof-found-almost-lost/)

~~~
sctb
We've updated the link from [https://www-wired-
com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.wired.com/2...](https://www-wired-
com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.wired.com/2017/04/elusive-math-proof-found-
almost-lost/amp/), which points to this original source.

