Eduardo, I guess you meant the comments of Serre quoted along with Mumford, Tate, and Arkani-Hamed in the note by Siobhan Roberts. (The note is at simonsfoundation.org/science_lives_bio/pierre-deligne/) Colin On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Colin McLarty <colin.mclarty@case.edu> wrote:

Where is the link to Serre's comments?

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Eduardo J. Dubuc <edubuc@dm.uba.ar> wrote:

...

On 29/01/13 09:08, Joyal, Andr? wrote:

...

An interview of Deligne by MacPherson:

https://simonsfoundation.org/category/features/science-lives/

I have not see the interview of Deligne by MacPherson in the link above, but I read in that link the comments of Serre on the mathematics of Deligne as opposed to the mathematics of Grothendieck, and his conclusion that Deligne is best. It is interesting to notice that when describing the characteristics and virtues of Deligne's mathematics he is just describing the characteristics and virtues of his own mathematics. Clearly Deligne's and Serre's mathematics are similar and different to Grothendieck's. In putting Deligne's mathematics at the top, Serre is just putting his own mathematics at the top.

[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]