4 ms·
This and many comments seem to miss the facts, at least as presented on the ABC conjecture's wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abc_conjecture http://e
by DMac87 12y ago
This and many comments seem to miss the facts, at least as presented on the ABC conjecture's wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abc_conjecture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abc_conjecture:
- An error was found in 2012 and was just recently (Nov 2014) corrected
- He's re-released his notes & lectures on the subject
- A workshop will be held on the topic in March
That doesn't seem to be unusual / isolationist behavior, though it's obviously a complicated topic and since Fermat's Last Theorem has been deemed 'solved' already, the fact that it makes a FLT proof easier isn't much appreciated by the press / community.
- lotsofmangos 12y agoHey, it's New Scientist - http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/beyond_the_beyond/2009/07/020709.jpg http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/beyond_the_beyond/2009/07/... The angry isolated maths geek sells better. This happened to Scientific American though and I stopped buying it. On a long enough timeline, it seems all popular science magazines may turn into Focus.