Go back
500 page math 'proof'' nobody understands:

500 page math 'proof'' nobody understands:

Science

s
Fast and Curious

slatington, pa, usa

Joined
28 Dec 04
Moves
53321
Clock
19 Dec 17
1 edit

http://www.sciencealert.com/nightmarish-500-page-math-proof-even-experts-can-t-understand-about-published-shinichi-mochizuki

This paper has been analysed for years with no consenous.

I wonder if Terence Tao has had a look?

h

Joined
06 Mar 12
Moves
642
Clock
19 Dec 17
6 edits

At least I am certainly not going to make the same mistake.
All the maths proofs I make to go into my book (yet-to-be published) will be all written so the average layperson will have no difficulty understanding them thus maths experts would certainly understand them!
No point in making a proof expressed such that nobody, not even the experts, understands it! A proof that apparently cannot be verified as being proof would completely defeat the whole point of a proof!
The main type of proof I will use in my book will be proof by contradiction, which is a type of proof that is actually very easy even for the maths naive to understand and I will explain each in plain English as well as mathematically.

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
20 Dec 17
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by @humy
At least I am certainly not going to make the same mistake.
All the maths proofs I make to go into my book (yet-to-be published) will be all written so the average layperson will have no difficulty understanding them thus maths experts would certainly understand them!
No point in making a proof expressed such that nobody, not even the experts, understands it ...[text shortened]... he maths naive to understand and I will explain each in plain English as well as mathematically.
Do you or do you not think that person A can discover
a mathematical proof that is incomprehensible to person B?

If no then you think that all abstract theorems are understandable
by the whole population. I think the evidence is against this.

If yes then you can continue applying this to diminishing
populations such that eventually there is nobody else to
understand the proof.

h

Joined
06 Mar 12
Moves
642
Clock
20 Dec 17
1 edit

Originally posted by @wolfgang59
Do you or do you not think that person A can discover
a mathematical proof that is incomprehensible to person B?

If no then you think that all abstract theorems are understandable
by the whole population. I think the evidence is against this.

If yes then you can continue applying this to diminishing
populations such that eventually there is nobody else to
understand the proof.
Do you or do you not think that person A can discover
a mathematical proof that is incomprehensible to person B?

of cause that is possible.
Thankfully, all my proofs just happen to be extremely easy to understand.
If yes then you can continue applying this to diminishing
populations such that eventually there is nobody else to
understand the proof.

What use does a proof have if nobody else can understand it?
It may have only rather limit personal use to the one person that understands it who produced it but still be completely useless to everyone else because nobody else would rationally know it is valid if nobody else can understand it thus everyone else would only have the word of the person that produced it that it is valid and that wouldn't be adequate. I think there really needs to be at least one other intelligent and generally trusted maths-expert person (or perhaps even just a computer or even an AI checking the proof! That has on the extremely rare occasion already happened in the past! ) that independently has studied it and says, yes, that proof is valid, before everyone else can rationally 'know' it is valid.

mlb62

Joined
20 May 17
Moves
17537
Clock
20 Dec 17

Originally posted by @sonhouse
http://www.sciencealert.com/nightmarish-500-page-math-proof-even-experts-can-t-understand-about-published-shinichi-mochizuki

This paper has been analysed for years with no consenous.

I wonder if Terence Tao has had a look?
don't forget about Ramanujan and the Akashic records !!

E

Joined
12 Jul 08
Moves
13814
Clock
20 Dec 17
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by @wolfgang59
Do you or do you not think that person A can discover
a mathematical proof that is incomprehensible to person B?

If no then you think that all abstract theorems are understandable
by the whole population. I think the evidence is against this.

If yes then you can continue applying this to diminishing
populations such that eventually there is nobody else to
understand the proof.
But who will believe it?

s
Fast and Curious

slatington, pa, usa

Joined
28 Dec 04
Moves
53321
Clock
20 Dec 17

Originally posted by @eladar
But who will believe it?
That's why I wondered if Terence Tao had a look. A guy with an IQ of 200+ should be able to suss it out.

D

Joined
08 Jun 07
Moves
2120
Clock
20 Dec 17
1 edit

s
Fast and Curious

slatington, pa, usa

Joined
28 Dec 04
Moves
53321
Clock
20 Dec 17
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

The post that was quoted here has been removed
Sounds like he was interested in something outside the world of math🙂

I wonder when AI will surpass humans in understanding maths? You probably heard of Alpha zero's destruction of Stockfish, wonder what it would do if taught the basics of math?

D

Joined
08 Jun 07
Moves
2120
Clock
20 Dec 17
1 edit

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
10 Dec 06
Moves
8528
Clock
21 Dec 17

The post that was quoted here has been removed
Well, did you go with him or not? Your choir of devout followers is just dying to know!

D

Joined
08 Jun 07
Moves
2120
Clock
21 Dec 17

HandyAndy
Read a book!

Joined
23 Sep 06
Moves
18677
Clock
21 Dec 17

Originally posted by @joe-shmo
Well, did you go with him or not? Your choir of devout followers is just dying to know!
Of course not. He was a rapist.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
10 Dec 06
Moves
8528
Clock
21 Dec 17
Vote Up
Vote Down

The post that was quoted here has been removed
Come again?

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
10 Dec 06
Moves
8528
Clock
21 Dec 17
3 edits

Originally posted by @handyandy
Of course not. He was a rapist.
Oh...So you’re saying he was white?

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.