Tiny typo on page 2. ( Surely completely innocuous. )
| Life In 19x19 http://www.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
| RH -- Sir Atiyah http://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=16099 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | EdLee [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | RH -- Sir Atiyah |
Tiny typo on page 2. ( Surely completely innocuous. ) |
|
| Author: | zorq [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RH -- Sir Atiyah |
EdLee wrote: Tiny typo on page 2. ( Surely completely innocuous.) Unfortunately, nothing in that note is correct. |
|
| Author: | Elom [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RH -- Sir Atiyah |
| Author: | Knotwilg [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RH -- Sir Atiyah |
zorq wrote: EdLee wrote: Tiny typo on page 2. ( Surely completely innocuous.) Unfortunately, nothing in that note is correct. At least it's imprecise. |
|
| Author: | zorq [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RH -- Sir Atiyah |
Knotwilg wrote: zorq wrote: Unfortunately, nothing in that note is correct. At least it's imprecise. Not imprecise. It is total rubbish. It shows that this famous powerful mathematician has lost his mental faculties. |
|
| Author: | EdLee [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 2:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The pros are being cautious. |
|
| Author: | jlt [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 2:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RH -- Sir Atiyah |
This looks like an 89 year-old 9p claiming for the third time he can still win an international tournament and play blitz while his opponent plays slowly. |
|
| Author: | Tryss [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 3:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
EdLee wrote: The pros are being cautious. No, they are not cautious, they are polite. But yeah, it's sad... and probably hard to manage for everybody involved 
|
|
| Author: | EdLee [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 3:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
To be skeptically cautious and polite are not mutually exclusive. 
|
|
| Author: | Tryss [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 3:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
EdLee wrote: To be skeptically cautious and polite are not mutually exclusive. When I say "they are not cautious, they are polite", I mean that, if it was not Atiyah or another great mathematician past his prime, they would probably say "Is this a joke? That's rubbish, there's nothing of value here" instead of "I'm skeptically cautious". |
|
| Author: | EdLee [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 3:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
We wait and see.
|
|
| Author: | Gomoto [ Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RH -- Sir Atiyah |
Let us ask Leela Zero about the winrate. |
|
| Author: | dfan [ Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RH -- Sir Atiyah |
In math, either you have a proof, where each step logically (provably) follows from some set of previous steps, concluding with the final result, or you don't, because, say, you can't prove that step G follows from step F. Your proof might have an error, and people might find that error once you publish it, but you don't publish it thinking that it's 50-50 whether there's an error or not. If you have an proof, you show it, and you say "I have a proof". You don't say "it seems like step F points towards step G, I wonder why"; if that were the case, it wouldn't be a proof, and you wouldn't publish it. You might say to your colleagues, "Hey, I feel like step F should imply step G, and if I could show it, I would have a proof of Z, does anyone have any bright ideas", or you might publish a conjecture that Z is true. But published proofs occur at a point in the process well past "It seems like such-and-such, I wonder why". |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|