Is this a correct proof of the Riemann Hypothesis?

  • #1
Found an article online detailing a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis:

<< link deleted by mentor - unacceptable source >>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Orodruin
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Gold Member
16,829
6,652
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.
 
  • #3
14,152
11,454
I this was true, we would have heard it even in the regular TV news. Unrecognized sensation? Nowadays???
 
  • #4
35,139
11,384
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 Pi-is-3, RelativeRelativity, DrClaude and 2 others
  • #5
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.
 
  • #6
14,152
11,454
I'll wait for the next Fields medalist and read it then.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
S.G. Janssens
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
938
715
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 Demystifier
  • #8
14,152
11,454
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.)
 
  • #9
35,139
11,384
Well, Perelman is special ;). And he was well-known before.
 
  • #10
Demystifier
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
11,220
3,884
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
jtbell
Mentor
15,722
3,858
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.
 

Related Threads on Is this a correct proof of the Riemann Hypothesis?

  • Last Post
Replies
15
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
700
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
44
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
25
Views
2K
Top