s*****V
发帖数: 21731 | 1 舒尔茨跟STIX花了几个月没看懂望月新一的证明，就说人家证明是有gap的这个是行不
通的。
Scholze, Stix don't have the magic power to veto arbitrary proofs
https://motls.blogspot.com/2018/11/scholze-stix-dont-have-magic-power-to.
html
望月新一的回答，虽然很如rude,但是不能说没有道理
I can only say that it is a very challenging task to document the depth of
my astonishment when I first read this Remark! This Remark may be described
as a breath-takingly (melo?)dramatic self-declaration, on the part of SS, of
their profound ignorance of the elementary theory of heights, at the
advanced undergraduate/beginning graduate level. | s*****V
发帖数: 21731 | 2 quora上面这个老中数学家说的很在理：
https://www.quora.com/Did-Peter-Scholze-and-Jakob-Stix-really-find-a-serious
-flaw-in-Shinichi-Mochizukis-proof-of-ABC-conjecture
According to Ivan Fesenko, Peter Scholze and Jakob Stix did not find a
serious flaw in Mochizuki’s proof (see end of page 5–6):
https://www.maths.nottingham.ac....
The situation is quite awkward as Senia Sheydvasser suggested. I think it
exposed a lot of ugly hidden rules in professional mathematics to the naked
eye. In normal situation, a proof only need to be checked by 5–6 experts
and it is ready to be published by a journal. Ivan Fesenko, who is the
advisor of a fields medalist, would be someone totally qualify to serve as a
referee. With his endorsement and positive reports from a few other people
who checked, the proof would be deemed correct and publishable.
What is unusual in this case is that many recognized experts in arithemetic
geometry believe none of the people who claim he/she checked Mochizuki’s
proof is correct are real experts. So their opinion are not trustworthy, no
matter how much time they spent in the subject. On the other hand Peter
Scholze and Jakob Stix are recognized experts because of their work on other
related fronts. Even though they spent comparably less time and effort
learning the proof, their opinion cannot be discarded. | x****6
发帖数: 4339 | 3 麻痹的，明星文化 连他么的数论界也侵蚀了。
serious
naked
【在 s*****V 的大作中提到】
: quora上面这个老中数学家说的很在理：
: https://www.quora.com/Did-Peter-Scholze-and-Jakob-Stix-really-find-a-serious
: -flaw-in-Shinichi-Mochizukis-proof-of-ABC-conjecture
: According to Ivan Fesenko, Peter Scholze and Jakob Stix did not find a
: serious flaw in Mochizuki’s proof (see end of page 5–6):
: https://www.maths.nottingham.ac....
: The situation is quite awkward as Senia Sheydvasser suggested. I think it
: exposed a lot of ugly hidden rules in professional mathematics to the naked
: eye. In normal situation, a proof only need to be checked by 5–6 experts
: and it is ready to be published by a journal. Ivan Fesenko, who is the
|
|
