4 ms·
I wouldn't know. But from the author's arXiv statement [1] that ..though all of my previous (dis)proofs were flawed, i think the flaws pointed me towards the r
by Quant10 4y ago
I wouldn't know. But from the author's arXiv statement [1] that
..though all of my previous (dis)proofs were flawed, i think the flaws pointed me towards the right direction..."
it seems they are quite confident in the current version.
[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.12546 https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.12546
- gus_massa 4y agoI've read that, but looking at the previous history I'd wait a month before reading it in case the author finds yet another error. (Unless you are a specialist in the subject.)
- Quant10 4y agoI'm a physics major, unfortunately. But i have taken some basic courses in number theory & analysis. As far as i can tell, the argument looks interesting (can't find any serious fault in it). However, i can't say anything conclusive. Maybe someone else will.