Mathematician Shinichi Mochizuki's proof on the ABC Conjecture will be verified to be valid by 2035.
Created by Tuxedage on 2013-05-11; known on 2035-01-01
- Tuxedage estimated 40% on 2013-05-11
- Tuxedage said “Related article:http://projectwordsworth.com/the-paradox-of-the-proof/This prediction will be marked ‘wrong’” on 2013-05-11
- Tuxedage said “ if the proof turns out to be wrong, or if nobody manages to verify its validity by the deadline. Consequently, if there are no challenges to the proof, with some mathematicians accepting the proof ” on 2013-05-11
- Tuxedage said “(Even if it’s not validated by the larger Mathematics community), then this prediction will be marked correct. ” on 2013-05-11
- Tuxedage said “Oh, and the paper itself in question: http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory%20I.pdf” on 2013-05-11
- gwern estimated 40% and said “a very long hard to understand proof using novel fields constructed in seclusion which no one else understands. Mochizuki may be a prodigy with many previous accomplishments, but it still doesn’t bode well for proof being fundamentally sound” on 2013-05-11
- JoshuaZ said “This may end up hard to decide. A difficulty with long proofs is deciding when a hole is large enough that the original doesn’t constitute a proof. The unique nature of what is here makes this sort of thing even more problematic. ” on 2013-05-12
- RandomThinker said “@joshuaZ can we not use the criteria of whether his name stays on the proof? Wiles’ proof of FLT had a bug but he fixed it and it’s still known as Wiles’ proof.” on 2013-05-13
- JoshuaZ said “That’s one criterion yes, but looked at how fuzzy that got with Poincare. ” on 2013-05-13
- alecbrooks estimated 35% on 2013-05-22
- JoshuaZ estimated 32% on 2013-05-22
- pranomostro estimated 36% on 2018-12-08
- Baeboo estimated 30% on 2018-12-12
- deleteyourbrain estimated 0% on 2019-04-26
- JoshuaZ estimated 2% on 2019-04-26
- Baeboo estimated 5% on 2019-04-27
- Baeboo estimated 2% on 2020-11-20