> The error concerned a part of the proof called Conjecture 3.12, seen as a vital part of Mochizuki’s efforts to solve the abc conjecture, which Scholze and Sti

> The error concerned a part of the proof called Conjecture 3.12, seen as a vital part of Mochizuki’s efforts to solve the abc conjecture, which Scholze and Stix claimed suffered from an unjustified leap of logic. “We came to the conclusion that there is no proof,” wrote the pair, who didn’t respond to a request to comment for this article. This is hard to understand. This element of the "proof" is named "Conjecture 3.12". Isn't that enough by itself to demonstrate that there is no proof? If there was a proof, Conjecture 3.12 would be a theorem, not a conjecture.