3 ms·

Some bitter conflict is referenced in footnote 1 of the 300 page summary. """ The author hears that a mathematician (I. F.), who pretends to understand inter-u

Some bitter conflict is referenced in footnote 1 of the 300 page summary. """ The author hears that a mathematician (I. F.), who pretends to understand inter-universal Teichm¨uller theory, suggests in a literature that the author began to study inter-universal Teichm¨uller theory “by his encouragement”. But, this differs from the fact that the author began it by his own will. The same person, in other context as well, modified the author’s email with quotation symbol “>” and fabricated an email, seemingly with ill-intention, as though the author had written it. The author would like to record these facts here for avoiding misunderstandings or misdirections, arising from these kinds of cheats, of the comtemporary and future people. """ I wonder if "I.F." is referring to the same "I.F." quoted in the original article. [1] http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~gokun/DOCUMENTS/abc_ver6.pdf http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~gokun/DOCUMENTS/abc_ver6.pd... [2] https://www.maths.nottingham.ac.uk/personal/ibf/activity.html https://www.maths.nottingham.ac.uk/personal/ibf/activity.htm...

sanxiyn 9y ago
Yes, I.F. is the one and the same.
kazinator 9y ago
I've personally modified thousands of e-mails with the ">" symbol; it's called replying. That, per se, has nothing to do with fabricating an e-mail; why mention it? Of course > symbols are fairly likely to be used in a forged e-mail, possibly next to fake quoted text; but that then is not simply an alteration of genuine text by the addition of those symbols.
- mintplant 9y ago
  >I've personally modified thousands of e-mails with the ">" symbol; it's called replying. That, per se, has nothing to do with fabricating an e-mail; why mention it? I read it as "I.F." making it look like something the author wrote was the author quoting "I.F.", or vice-versa. For example, From: John Doe <johndoe@gmail.com> The meaning of life is 42. becomes From: John Doe <johndoe@gmail.com> > The meaning of life is 42. Thanks for the help!
mrkgnao 9y ago
For those unwilling to click through, I.F. is Ivan Fesenko. Among other things, he wrote this article about Mochizuki's work: http://inference-review.com/article/fukugen http://inference-review.com/article/fukugen

sanxiyn 9y ago

Yes, I.F. is the one and the same.

kazinator 9y ago

I've personally modified thousands of e-mails with the ">" symbol; it's called replying. That, per se, has nothing to do with fabricating an e-mail; why mention it? Of course > symbols are fairly likely to be used in a forged e-mail, possibly next to fake quoted text; but that then is not simply an alteration of genuine text by the addition of those symbols.

mintplant 9y ago
>I've personally modified thousands of e-mails with the ">" symbol; it's called replying. That, per se, has nothing to do with fabricating an e-mail; why mention it? I read it as "I.F." making it look like something the author wrote was the author quoting "I.F.", or vice-versa. For example, From: John Doe <johndoe@gmail.com> The meaning of life is 42. becomes From: John Doe <johndoe@gmail.com> > The meaning of life is 42. Thanks for the help!

mrkgnao 9y ago

For those unwilling to click through, I.F. is Ivan Fesenko. Among other things, he wrote this article about Mochizuki's work: http://inference-review.com/article/fukugen http://inference-review.com/article/fukugen