Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the process of obtaining endorsement for publishing a proof of the Goldbach Conjecture on arXiv. Participants explore the challenges of proving such a significant mathematical claim and the necessary steps to gain endorsement from qualified individuals.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Exploratory
- Technical explanation
Main Points Raised
- One participant expresses confidence in having found a proof for the Goldbach Conjecture and seeks guidance on obtaining endorsement for publication.
- Another participant cautions that the likelihood of having a valid proof is extremely low, referencing the historical context of failed claims regarding the conjecture.
- Concerns are raised about the participant's rapid progression from not understanding proofs to claiming to have one, suggesting skepticism about the validity of their claim.
- There is a suggestion that endorsement may be sought from someone at a local university, but that potential endorsers may find errors in the work.
- One participant references the historical successes of other mathematicians, questioning the discouragement implied by earlier comments about publishing proofs.
- Another participant emphasizes that having multiple examples does not constitute a proof, reinforcing the need for rigorous validation.
- There is a critique regarding the participant's approach to seeking endorsement and the importance of respecting the contributions of established mathematicians.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants generally disagree on the feasibility of the original claim regarding the proof of the Goldbach Conjecture. While some express skepticism and caution, others advocate for the pursuit of publication, leading to an unresolved discussion.
Contextual Notes
Participants highlight the importance of rigorous validation in mathematics and the historical context of conjectures, but there is no consensus on the validity of the claim or the approach to endorsement.