Somewhere in the suburbs of freezing cold St. Petersburg, Russia, a bearded, reclusive, and very brilliant forty-one year old man is sleeping in the spare room of his pension-dependent motherí¢â‚¬â„¢s apartment. Feeling misunderstood by and isolated from the math world that currently worships his work, Grigori Perelman has steadily cut himself off from all official contact with the mathematical community, retreating instead to a solitary existence of exploring numerical calculations.

Perelman has always been a progressive thinker within the abstract realm of theoretical mathematics, but in the winter of 2003 it became clear that, more than just forward-thinking, he is instead, a mathematical genius.

What differentiates Perelman from other so-called geniuses í¢â‚¬“ and indeed defines him as a fascinating anomaly í¢â‚¬“ has been his complete aversion to any form of recognition for his abilities. Without making any real effort to publicize his work, Perelman posted proofs on a website that solved the illusive Poincare conjecture, a complicated problem that has eluded the math worldí¢â‚¬â„¢s most brilliant minds for almost a century. To quickly summarize an intensely complex problem, the Poincare Conjecture states that the three-sphere is the only type of bounded three-dimensional space possible that contains no holes - a problem that, prior to Perelman, had yet to be successfully proven. While understanding the full implications of solving this puzzle may require a fistful of degrees, some observers have said that the ability to solve the Poincare leads to nothing short of improving our means to describe the very shape of our universe. At the risk of understating its importance, Perelmaní¢â‚¬â„¢s proofs are a major contribution to the world of mathematics.

The evasiveness of this problem for great mathematicians the world around becomes equally difficult to abridge. Obsessing over nailing down comprehensible and defendable proofs has sunk the careers of many great minds; attempts at solving the conjecture have been torn to shreds and reputations of numerous respected professors -hell bent on the belief that they could discover a legitimate proof to the illusive Poincare Conjecture í¢â‚¬“ have been ruined.What fascinates about Perelman is that he knew full well that his was one of the most significant breakthroughs in modern mathematics, yet to this day has done close to nothing to promote his own work, or his discovery. He didní¢â‚¬â„¢t submit his proof to any journals and has avoidedí¢â‚¬”even actively refusedí¢â‚¬”sending his works down the requisite channels to claim the one million dollar prize offered by the Clay Mathematics Institute (a privately funded foundation dedicated to increasing and disseminating mathematics) to anyone able to solve the conjecture. He has little to no money, yet refuses to seek more. He has no job, but has turned down offers from numerous prestigious academic institutions throughout the world.

Even stranger is the fact that Perelman seems genuinely unconcerned that others have picked up his work and are set to potentially collect the prize money in his place. Furthermore, he has since declined the offer of the King of Spain, who was to present him with the Fieldí¢â‚¬â„¢s Medal, a prize for excellence in mathematical research which is often regarded as the Nobel Prize of math. So while others scheme to milk his proofs for all their worth, Perelman has contented himself with posting his proofs online, and leaving his work to speak for itself. This in turn has left him where he wants to be: free to traverse the realm of mathematics on his own terms, searching for the answers to the problems and equations that govern his intellectual passions.

Quite opposite to how social conventions have taught us to act, Perelman has vigorously retreated from anything which contains even the slightest hint of praise. The past few years of Perelmaní¢â‚¬â„¢s career have followed a steady pattern: the more he contributes to the math community, the more he wishes to hide. And heí¢â‚¬â„¢s downright stubborn about it. The refusal to accept praise is a rare trait to find, and with that in mind, it is exceedingly difficult to fully comprehend the rationale behind Perelmaní¢â‚¬â„¢s decisions. His claims alternate between the fact that the math community doesní¢â‚¬â„¢t understand him or that they doní¢â‚¬â„¢t respect his work, both of which seem logically incoherent considering the magnitude of the accolades - financial and otherwise - that have been bestowed on him over the past few years. Much like anyone who steers off the course of social convention, insanity, of course steps in as the default assumption. If this is the case, no one close to him has suggested it in earnest, and nothing he has done besides sidestepping off his presumed course of action really warrants such an accusation.

So, his decision stands, and in his contradictory nature, something compelling, even admirable, lies in his refusal of recognition. Western society has made the reception of praise and recognition an essential part of our daily lives, so that when something as large as a major breakthrough is made we expect to praise the person who produced it to not only recognize, but to also enjoy it. But for Perelman, no adulation is necessary. It is the process that led him to the conclusion that drives him, not simply the social worth of the conclusions themselves. In his obsession with the most complexing of mathematical problems, Perelman has presumably re-calculated the basic math of í¢â‚¬Ëœdo something good, and get rewardedí¢â‚¬â„¢ that underlines society to a place where praise has no legitimate function.

His true motivation may be is impossible to understand, and it continues to boggle the mathematical world and defy social norms and practices. And however we may judge his decisions, Perelman is seemingly content to go on his daily walks in St. Petersburg, share a living space with his mother, and challenge mathematical problems that few can understand.