3 ms·
Minhyong Kim (cited from the article) makes a good point: that "any journal would probably require independent reviewers who have not studied under Mochizuki to
by roberthahn 12y ago
Minhyong Kim (cited from the article) makes a good point: that "any journal would probably require independent reviewers who have not studied under Mochizuki to verify the proof."
Given that, Mochizuki is stuck between a rock and a hard place - anyone he brings up to speed automatically becomes disqualified to independently review his work.
I'm not so sure this is entirely his fault.
EDIT: tpyo
- gecko 12y agoWhile you're correct, part of the fix for that is not to publish a 500-page paper in isolation. You instead publish the underlying concepts piecemeal in "easy"-to-understand chunks (for this insane level of "easy", hence the quotes). This works the same as how good practice when writing code is not to drop a 50 ksloc commit, but rather to do a series of patches showing how you arrived at a given solution.