Clay Mathematics Institute Says Navier-Stokes Problem 'Apparently' Settled
CMI acknowledges a claimed solution to the fluid-dynamics Millennium Prize Problem but has not named an author or confirmed the proof.
What to know
- CMI's statement does not name who produced the claimed proof or link to it, leaving the substance of the announcement unverified in the provided material.
- The Navier-Stokes problem is one of seven Millennium Prize Problems, each carrying a $1M award; only the Poincaré conjecture has previously been resolved and awarded.
- CMI says its credit-assignment and verification process is 'deliberately unhurried', so formal confirmation is not immediate.
Clay Mathematics Institute Prize-awarding organizationUnnamed author(s) of the claimed proof Claimed solver(s) of the Navier-Stokes problem
How it unfolded 1 development · click the chart to see its coverage articlesposts
-
1
CMI acknowledges the Navier-Stokes problem 'apparently' solved
CMI published a statement saying it 'shares in the excitement of the global mathematical community' over an announcement that the problem has been settled, without naming an author, and said its rules for evaluating and assigning credit will apply through a deliberately unhurried process.
“Today, CMI shares in the excitement of the global mathematical community as we contemplate the announcement that the Navier-Stokes problem has apparently been settled.”
— Clay Mathematics Institute -
2 outlets Navier-Stokes Announcement
first by HN Best, 12d ago · also HN Frontpage
1 more headline
- Clay Mathematics Institute on the Navier-Stokes Problem HN Frontpage · 12d ago
-
In my opinion, I think the Clay Mathematics Institute deserves some criticism for all the drama surrounding these problems. Mathematicians know that you can make problems arbitrarily complex, and declaring problems with large prizes attached to them can lead to a lot of competition and drama. I feel that mathematics should be free from…
2 more of the top 3 · 17 posts in this stretch
-
H
Navier-Stokes Announcement Link: https://www. claymath.org/news/navier-stoke s-announcement/ Discussion: https:// news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4 9668706
-
Recent and related. Others?OpenAI’s Navier-Stokes release included a Lean 4 formal proof - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49650326 - Sept 2026 (179 comments)More questions about whether researchers can trust OpenAI with unpublished math - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49639408 - Sept 2026 (813 comments)The Navier–Stokes Millennium…
-
-
background
Field-wide breakthroughs raise hopes of a Navier-Stokes resolution — CMI notes an 'increasing sense of anticipation' from recent breakthroughs, some recognized by the Clay Research Award, plus new technology accelerating mathematical research, that made a resolution seem imminent.
-
background
CMI unveils the Millennium Prize Problems in Paris — The Clay Mathematics Institute announced seven Millennium Prize Problems, each carrying a $1M award, including the Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness problem.
What people are saying 12 voices from 2 sites · best of 17 · verbatim
- Sep 12
-
What I'm not seeing reported on much is if the result reveals any new techniques or ideas that advance mathematics - which is what we usually hear is the reason to work on these problems. Or does the resolution of NS just add a fact to the list without any new understanding.
-
N
Navier-Stokes Announcement: https://www. claymath.org/news/navier-stoke s-announcement/ Discussion: http:// news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4 9668706
-
And chances are they never will publish it in any kind of useful format. Right now, the entire scientific community is outraged at OpenAI for going about their announcement in the least productive fashion they could have.
-
The two-year publication rule is the interesting part. OpenAI doesn't need the million, and the community will judge the result regardless of whether Clay ever accepts it.
-
I am utterly fascinated by the amount of comments here from engineers that clearly have zero experience with mathematics making utter fool of themselves by claiming to know better than mathematicians what their jargon is/means, how publishing works/should work, etc…I try not to go down the route of “hn was better before!” but… jeez, do better…
-
I'm not sure it actually makes a difference. OpenAI doesn't care about the million dollars in any case. And the judgement that they did it is independent of whether the Clay people agree: you can make up your own mind and so can everyone else.Though it would be funny if no one ever bothers publishing the result in an appropriate journal, and thus…
-
The Lean proof is published, you can download it. The clock definitely is ticking.Edit: Oh, didn't see the "qualifying outlet" condition. But Poincare was ever just put on arXiv, so arXiv must count as well.
-
It’s easy to verify the lean statement, you don’t need to read the proof. That is part of the breakthrough
-
It's worth mentioning that OpenAI will not be eligible for the Millennium Prize for quite a while. Per the rules listed https://www.claymath.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/millenni... , Clay Mathematics Institute have some requirements to make this process deliberately slow.1) The solution must be published in a qualifying outlet, i.e. a…
-
Their rules PDF says they won't accept any solution until at least two years after publication in a qualifying outlet. This allows time for the mathematical community to review and accept new results.As the OpenAI proof hasn't been officially published yet, the clock hasn't started ticking.
-
Smart move by them for waiting until the drama died down before making a completely neutral statement.The statement is so sterile they don't even mention who solved it. The word "OpenAI" doesn't appear at all.
-
sounds like they are providing notice that the clock has started on affirming the solution, that it IS presumptively solved, but that they are not commenting on the credit dispute nor the fields medalists open letter. seems appropriate.