皮埃尔·德利涅（法語：Pierre Deligne，发音：[pjɛʁ dəliɲ]；1944年10月3日—），全称德利涅子爵皮埃尔·勒内（法語：Pierre René, vicomte Deligne），比利时代数几何学者，20世纪中后期最知名的数学家之一。他最重要的贡献之一是20世纪70年代关于韦伊猜想的工作。他是大数学家亚历山大·格罗滕迪克的学生。
德利涅生于布鲁塞尔，自幼数学天赋出众，初中时就在老师建议下开始阅读布尔巴基小组写的专著《集合论》，高中时就已经获得机会进入前沿数学家的讨论班。他就读于布鲁塞尔自由大学，曾受知名数学家雅克·蒂茨栽培，后来又被带到布尔巴基学派的讨论班上和亚历山大·格罗滕迪克等其他重要数学家见面。他回忆第一次见到格罗腾迪克时，觉得对方高个子、大光头的形象有点怪异[1]。已是大数学家的格罗滕迪克对当时还是新人的德利涅所问的问题给与了耐心的解释，这让德利涅觉得格罗滕迪克非常有亲和力[2]。
1968年他在亚历山大·格罗滕迪克指导下完成博士论文。1970年26岁的德利涅成为法國高等科學研究所教授。他在那里完成了关于霍奇理论和韦伊猜想的工作。格罗滕迪克很有信心按照自己提供的一套思路框架来逐步解决韦伊猜想，并借此证明其数学思想的威力，但是德利涅却另辟蹊径搞定了韦伊猜想。德利涅虽凭借这一成绩获得了菲尔兹奖，但是他也承认老师格罗滕迪克对此事并不满意[3]。格罗滕迪克的老搭档让-皮埃尔·塞尔则觉得韦伊猜想被解决是一件值得开心的事情[4]。
1984年，德利涅移居美国，进入普林斯顿高等研究院。在普林斯顿的生活同样充满挑战，这里的讨论会经常是数学家和物理学家共同参加的，他也在这里遇见了爱德华·威滕这样的提问既有意思、又能把自己难倒的顶尖物理学家[5]。普林斯顿开展的学科研究和会议也更为广泛，他也会忙里抽闲去听中国古代历史之类的人文及社会类学科的报告会[6]。
2013年，德利涅在阿贝尔奖得奖采访中表示自己觉得导师的动机理论在今后10年内看不到有明显进展的迹象，但自己也做好了被打脸的准备[7]。
德利涅认为研究数学应该更关注新工具的创造和对学科大图景的理解。他的导师格罗滕迪克曾对他说过数学绝不是一种竞赛式的活动。[8]
他笑称物理学家经常喜欢套用一些原理说不清、道不明的数学技巧，但是不得不承认其做法确实很管用，得到的计算结果有不少还都是对的[9]。物理学家爱德华·威滕能看穿复杂数学公式和证明背后的直观图像的本领也令他不得不服[10]。
德利涅1978年获得菲尔兹奖，1988年获得克拉福德奖，2008年获得沃尔夫奖，2013年获得阿贝尔奖。
2006年比利时国王封德利涅为子爵。[11]
见Raussen 2013，第17-19頁，摘录如下：“He was a little strange, with his shaved head, a very tall man.” 见Raussen 2013，第17-19頁，摘录如下：“I think that many other mathematicians would have thought that if you didn't know the answer, there wouldn’t be any point to speak to you. This was not his reaction at all. Very patiently he told me that... He was very open to people who were ignorant. I think that you should not ask him the same stupid question three times, but twice was all right.” 见Raussen 2013，第17-19頁，摘录如下：“I used a completely different idea. It is inspired by the work of Rankin and his work on automorphic forms. It still has a number of applications, but it did not realize the dream of Grothendieck. ... It would have been much nicer if his program had been realized. He did not think that there would be another way to do it. When he heard I had proved it, he felt I must have done this and that, which I hadn't. I think that’s the reason for the disappointment.” 见Raussen 2013，第20-22頁，摘录如下：“In both places there are physicists, but I think the contact with them was more fruitful for me in Princeton than it was in Bures. In Princeton, there have been common seminars. One year was very intense, with both mathematicians and physicists participating. This was due mainly to the presence of Edward Witten. He has received the Fields Medal even though he is a physicist. When Witten asks me questions, it's always very interesting to try to answer them, but it can be frustrating as well.” 见Raussen 2013，第20-22頁，摘录如下：“Princeton is also bigger in the sense that it has not only maths and physics, but also the School of Historical Studies and the School of Social Sciences. There is no real scientific interaction with these Schools but it is pleasant to be able to go and hear a lecture about, for instance, ancient China.” 见Raussen 2013，第22頁，摘录如下：“Whether or not it's within reach in ten years, I have absolutely no idea; as it should be… but I would very much like to see progress in our understanding of motives. Which path to take and what are the correct questions, is very much in the air. Grothendieck's program relied on proving the existence of algebraic cycles with some properties. To me this looks hopeless, but I may be wrong.” 见Raussen 2013，第21頁，摘录如下：“For Grothendieck it was very clear: he once told me that mathematics is not a competition sport. Mathematicians are different and some will want to be the first, especially if they are working on very specific and difficult questions. For me it's more important to create tools and to understand the general picture.” 见Raussen 2013，第22頁，摘录如下：“In yet another direction, physicists regularly come up with unexpected conjectures, most often using completely illegal tools. But so far, whenever they have made a prediction, for instance a numerical prediction on the number of curves with certain properties on some surface - and these are big numbers, in the millions perhaps - they were right! Sometimes previous computations by mathematicians were not in accordance with what the physicists were predicting, but the physicists were right.” 见Raussen 2013，第22頁，摘录如下：“They have put their fingers on something really interesting, but we are, so far, unable to capture their intuition. Sometimes they make a prediction and we work out a very clumsy proof without real understanding. That is not how it should be. In one of the seminar programs that we had with the physicists at IAS, my wish was not to have to rely on Ed Witten but instead to be able to make conjectures myself. I failed! I did not understand enough of their picture to be able to do that, so I still have to rely on Witten to tell me what should be interesting.”
- 官方网站
- 《大英百科全书》中的条目：皮埃尔·德利涅（英文）
- 約翰·J·奧康納; 埃德蒙·F·羅伯遜, Deligne, MacTutor数学史档案 （英语）
- 皮埃尔·德利涅在數學譜系計畫的資料。
- 皮埃尔·德利涅 at Goodreads
- Roberts, Siobhan. Simons Foundation: Pierre Deligne. Simons Foundation. 2012-06-19 [2020-09-15]. （原始内容存档于2012-07-30）.
- Katz, Nick, The Work Of Pierre Deligne, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, Helsinki 1978 [1978年赫尔辛基国际数学家大会进展报告] (pdf), Helsinki: 47–52, June 1980, ISBN 951-410-352-1[永久失效連結]
![[icon]](#/media/File:Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg){kind=small}
_(cropped).jpg)
