[math-fun] proof of ABC conjecture?
If this is true, then definitely Mochizuki deserves the Fields Medal, the works. I have no evidence it is true, though. His "inter-universal" work is far outside MY universe, I pretty much can't understand a word. And I doubt many number theorists can either. It doesn't look like number theory normally looks. So I actually had sent a little tip to the NY Times science section saying "possible big story re ABC." Then I actually got a reply, basically saying "Nah, we at the NY Times will be highly interested in ABC, so thanks for the tip, *but* only when proof is confirmed, we don't report on maybe-proofs, we're not that kind of low-class paper." But, lo and behold, in today's science section there is a story on ABC by K.Chang. -- Warren D. Smith
Aha -- which may indicate that Chang called around and found many experts who do believe the proof. What does Terry Tao's blog say? That would probably have the latest buzz. --Dan On 2012-09-18, at 5:10 PM, Warren Smith wrote:
If this is true, then definitely Mochizuki deserves the Fields Medal, the works. I have no evidence it is true, though. His "inter-universal" work is far outside MY universe, I pretty much can't understand a word. And I doubt many number theorists can either. It doesn't look like number theory normally looks.
So I actually had sent a little tip to the NY Times science section saying "possible big story re ABC." Then I actually got a reply, basically saying "Nah, we at the NY Times will be highly interested in ABC, so thanks for the tip, *but* only when proof is confirmed, we don't report on maybe-proofs, we're not that kind of low-class paper." But, lo and behold, in today's science section there is a story on ABC by K.Chang.
Aha -- which may indicate that Chang called around and found many experts who do believe the proof.
Dan, I admire but do not share your faith. Charles Greathouse Analyst/Programmer Case Western Reserve University On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Dan Asimov <dasimov@earthlink.net> wrote:
Aha -- which may indicate that Chang called around and found many experts who do believe the proof.
What does Terry Tao's blog say? That would probably have the latest buzz.
--Dan
On 2012-09-18, at 5:10 PM, Warren Smith wrote:
If this is true, then definitely Mochizuki deserves the Fields Medal, the works. I have no evidence it is true, though. His "inter-universal" work is far outside MY universe, I pretty much can't understand a word. And I doubt many number theorists can either. It doesn't look like number theory normally looks.
So I actually had sent a little tip to the NY Times science section saying "possible big story re ABC." Then I actually got a reply, basically saying "Nah, we at the NY Times will be highly interested in ABC, so thanks for the tip, *but* only when proof is confirmed, we don't report on maybe-proofs, we're not that kind of low-class paper." But, lo and behold, in today's science section there is a story on ABC by K.Chang.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
Yeah, I've now read the Chang article and it doesn't really contain any evidence even from expert opinion that Mochizuki has a proof. But it contains a notable absence of serious skepticism, plus significant belief that right or wrong, Mochizuki's paper(s) contain some major advances and insight. --Dan On 2012-09-18, at 6:19 PM, Charles Greathouse wrote:
Aha -- which may indicate that Chang called around and found many experts who do believe the proof.
Dan, I admire but do not share your faith.
Here is a selection of abc links, including Terry Tau's blog which only gives heuristics for abc being true: http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=5104 http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/thoughts-english.html http://michaelnielsen.org/polymath1/index.php?title=ABC_conjecture http://mathoverflow.net/questions/106560/philosophy-behind-mochizukis-work-o... http://www.math.leidenuniv.nl/~desmit/abc/index.php?set=2 http://www.math.unicaen.fr/~nitaj/abc.html http://terrytao.wordpress.com/ On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:11 PM, Dan Asimov <dasimov@earthlink.net> wrote:
Aha -- which may indicate that Chang called around and found many experts who do believe the proof.
What does Terry Tao's blog say? That would probably have the latest buzz.
--Dan
On 2012-09-18, at 5:10 PM, Warren Smith wrote:
If this is true, then definitely Mochizuki deserves the Fields Medal, the works. I have no evidence it is true, though. His "inter-universal" work is far outside MY universe, I pretty much can't understand a word. And I doubt many number theorists can either. It doesn't look like number theory normally looks.
So I actually had sent a little tip to the NY Times science section saying "possible big story re ABC." Then I actually got a reply, basically saying "Nah, we at the NY Times will be highly interested in ABC, so thanks for the tip, *but* only when proof is confirmed, we don't report on maybe-proofs, we're not that kind of low-class paper." But, lo and behold, in today's science section there is a story on ABC by K.Chang.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
Unfortunately for Mochizuki he's over 40, which is the hard cutoff for Fields Medals (just ask Andrew Wiles). Victor On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Warren Smith <warren.wds@gmail.com> wrote:
If this is true, then definitely Mochizuki deserves the Fields Medal, the works. I have no evidence it is true, though. His "inter-universal" work is far outside MY universe, I pretty much can't understand a word. And I doubt many number theorists can either. It doesn't look like number theory normally looks.
So I actually had sent a little tip to the NY Times science section saying "possible big story re ABC." Then I actually got a reply, basically saying "Nah, we at the NY Times will be highly interested in ABC, so thanks for the tip, *but* only when proof is confirmed, we don't report on maybe-proofs, we're not that kind of low-class paper." But, lo and behold, in today's science section there is a story on ABC by K.Chang.
-- Warren D. Smith
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
Yeah. If they could overturn the will of Dr. Barnes to bring the Barnes collection to Philadelphia, I hope they will overturn the informal requirement that is not in the papers formalizing the Fields medal. I find the 40-year-old cutoff to be idiotic. (It's not as though talented young mathematicians need an extra incentive to do good work. Though maybe they did in 1936 -- I don't know.) --Dan On 2012-09-18, at 6:39 PM, Victor Miller wrote:
Unfortunately for Mochizuki he's over 40, which is the hard cutoff for Fields Medals (just ask Andrew Wiles).
participants (5)
-
Charles Greathouse -
Dan Asimov -
James Buddenhagen -
Victor Miller -
Warren Smith