No, Mochizuki’s “proof” is likely to be fatally flawed. He has almost entirely refused to engage with careful and targeted criticism by the experts who found wh

No, Mochizuki’s “proof” is likely to be fatally flawed. He has almost entirely refused to engage with careful and targeted criticism by the experts who found what they claim is a serious flaw. Mochizuki finally went ahead and published his work in a journal where he is the editor in chief. So much for peer review.