Count Iblis
- 1,858
- 8
http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.0892"
Last edited by a moderator:
The forum discussion centers on the ongoing attempts to prove the Riemann Hypothesis, referencing multiple papers, including those found at arXiv:0806.0892 and arXiv:0807.0090. Participants express skepticism regarding the validity of these proofs, with mentions of the "crackpot test" to evaluate the credibility of the authors. Notably, Terence Tao's doubts about the approaches taken in these proofs are highlighted, emphasizing the complexity and contentious nature of the topic. The discussion reflects a mix of admiration for the efforts and skepticism about their outcomes.
PREREQUISITESMathematicians, number theorists, and students interested in advanced mathematical proofs and the ongoing discourse surrounding the Riemann Hypothesis.
Count Iblis said:http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.0892"
Dragonfall said:Crackpots don't doubt themselves, so this guy passes the crackpot test.
Count Iblis said:Did Wiles also pass the Crackpot test when he announced he found the proof of Fermat's theorem, only to discover later that there was a fatal flaw in it [which he was able to fix later at the very moment when he was taking a final look to understand better why he had faled and why he would not be able to succeed (making it easier to put the matter to rest in his mind)].
Or does the Crackpot test itself pass the Crackpot test![]()
I suppose this is a catch-22, for if they were convinced, I'd generally be even less optimistic.Hurkyl said:I confess if they aren't even convinced, I find it hard to be optimistic.
Dragonfall said:Well, far be it for us to question a Fields medalist.
EDIT: Ok I applaud the effort of this auto-keyword-link thing, but this has gone too far!
neutrino said: