Is this a correct proof of the Riemann Hypothesis?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of a claimed proof of the Riemann Hypothesis, examining the credibility of the source and the general skepticism surrounding unverified mathematical proofs. Participants explore the implications of publishing standards and peer review in mathematics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested, Technical explanation, Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism towards the proof due to its publication in a predatory journal, suggesting that reputable peer review is essential for credibility.
  • One participant argues that if the proof were valid, it would have gained significant media attention, indicating a lack of recognition for unverified claims.
  • Flow charts are presented by multiple participants to outline criteria for evaluating major proofs, emphasizing the importance of journal submission and peer review status.
  • A counterexample is provided regarding Perelman’s proof of the Poincaré conjecture, which was posted on arXiv, challenging the notion that all valid proofs must go through traditional publishing routes.
  • Concerns are raised about the length and complexity of the proof being discussed, with some participants questioning its legitimacy based on its presentation format.
  • There are inquiries about the availability of competent individuals within the forum to review the mathematics, but a participant clarifies that the forum does not conduct professional peer review.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of peer review and reputable publication for validating mathematical proofs. However, there is disagreement regarding the necessity of traditional publishing routes, as illustrated by the discussion of Perelman’s case.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the reliance on the credibility of the source and the unresolved status of the proof's peer review process. The discussion does not resolve the validity of the proof itself.

fieldofforce
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Found an article online detailing a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis:

<< link deleted by mentor - unacceptable source >>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
No. Science Research Publishing (scirp) is a known predatory publisher and is generally not to be trusted.

I would be very sceptical to any paper claiming to solve the Riemann hypothesis unless it has been checked by the reviewers of a reputable mathematics journal.
 
I this was true, we would have heard it even in the regular TV news. Unrecognized sensation? Nowadays?
 
Flow chart for claims of major proofs:

Is it sent to one of the leading journals?
-- No: It is not a valid proof
-- Yes: Did it pass peer review?
-----In progress: It is probably not a valid proof
-----No: It is not a valid proof
-----Yes: It gets interesting. Did a mathematician find a flaw within 2 years?
--------Yes: It is not a valid proof.
--------No: It is probably a valid proof.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pi-is-3, RelativeRelativity, DrClaude and 2 others
Thank you. Is there individual(s) at Physics Forums competent to check the math and find the flaw(s) if there is/are any?

If there is anyone competent please let me know. I would like to chat or e-mail details of the math.
 
I'll wait for the next Fields medalist and read it then.
 
Last edited:
mfb said:
Flow chart for claims of major proofs:

Is it sent to one of the leading journals?
-- No: It is not a valid proof
Counterexample: Perelman posted his proof of the geometrization conjecture on the arXiv (11 November 2002, 10 March 2003, 17 July 2003). By doing so he solved the Poincaré conjecture and was awarded the Fields medal, which he declined.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
Krylov said:
Counterexample: Perelman posted his proof of the geometrization conjecture on the arXiv (11 November 2002, 10 March 2003, 17 July 2003). By doing so he solved the Poincaré conjecture and was awarded the Fields medal, which he declined.
He also declined the award from CMI for solving one of the Millennium problems, if it is correct, what I've read. That is, he didn't take $1,000,000. (Nevertheless, ##8## pages to solve RH alone is suspicious.)
 
Well, Perelman is special ;). And he was well-known before.
 
  • #10
mfb said:
Flow chart for claims of major proofs:

Is it sent to one of the leading journals?
-- No: It is not a valid proof
-- Yes: Did it pass peer review?
-----In progress: It is probably not a valid proof
-----No: It is not a valid proof
-----Yes: It gets interesting. Did a mathematician find a flaw within 2 years?
--------Yes: It is not a valid proof.
--------No: It is probably a valid proof.
There is one additional criterion:
Is the paper written with LaTeX?
-- No: It is not a valid proof.

The Perelman papers are written with LaTeX, while the paper we discuss here does not seem to be.
 
  • #11
fieldofforce said:
Is there individual(s) at Physics Forums competent to check the math and find the flaw(s) if there is/are any?
We don't do professional peer review here, sorry. The way to get that is to submit the article to a reputable journal and let them do it via their reviewers.

With that, this thread is now closed.
 

Similar threads

Insights The History and Importance of the Riemann Hypothesis
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
High School Get up to speed with the Riemann Hypothesis
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Graduate Where is the usual sensationalism? (Riemann Hypothesis)
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Graduate Has the Riemann hypothesis been proven?
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
18K
Graduate Has anything similar to the Riemann hypothesis ever solved
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad |Li(x) - pi(x)| goes to 0 under RH?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Insights The Extended Riemann Hypothesis and Ramanujan’s Sum
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Graduate Is this a valid physical analogy for the Riemann Hypothesis?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate How Riemann hypothesis would break internet security?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Undergrad Wrong proofs of Riemann hypothesis
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K