4 ms·
The consensus is that Mochizuki's theory, at least insofar as it claims to prove ABC, is probably incorrect. (Otherwise this workshop would be a lot more popula
by impendia 11y ago
The consensus is that Mochizuki's theory, at least insofar as it claims to prove ABC, is probably incorrect. (Otherwise this workshop would be a lot more popular.)
But not definitely incorrect. Mochizuki is certainly not an obvious crank. His theory may be right, perhaps only partially -- in which case it will be enormously consequential. So it's still worth paying attention to. (In Minhyong Kim's judgment, which carries a hell of a lot more weight than mine.)
I do stand corrected a little bit: I see that a couple other reputable mathematicians have already invested some time digesting his work, and further that Mochizuki has decided to be more open to answering questions.
- valera_rozuvan 11y agoThe most detailed and up-to-date resource on the link between ABC conjecture and Mochizuki's inter-universal Teichmuller theory, IMHO, is http://michaelnielsen.org/polymath1/index.php?title=ABC_conjecture http://michaelnielsen.org/polymath1/index.php?title=ABC_conj... . It lists a survey article on IUT Theory by Ivan Fesenko entitled "ARITHMETIC DEFORMATION THEORY VIA ARITHMETIC FUNDAMENTAL GROUPS AND NONARCHIMEDEAN THETA-FUNCTIONS, NOTES ON THE WORK OF SHINICHI MOCHIZUKI" [preprint February 2015] ( https://www.maths.nottingham.ac.uk/personal/ibf/notesoniut.pdf https://www.maths.nottingham.ac.uk/personal/ibf/notesoniut.p... ).