>>10929749i mean, his "proof" of the Riemann Hypothesis, to me, is much less notable than the fact that in his work that the RH proof is contingent upon, he claimed to have derived the electromagnetic coupling constant (alpha, AKA the "fine structure constant" [up to trivial proportionality constants]) from first principles
in other words he basically claimed that he was deriving physics from pure math -- he got a fundamental physical constant from pure Todd functions or some shit.
i tried following his derivation of the fine structure constant and it didn't work. i read his paper for it more closely and it said "i did it in a few 'tranches' and iteratively did some shit" which is totally ambiguous. so i concluded it was BS.
my hope was that his heir/executor would find whatever code he used to do that supposed calculation that was supposedly accurate to 9 (or whatever) digits of the fine structure constant, but nobody has so far.
i think he just went schizo or alternatively he was trying to create a meme for future generations. it was very weird, but in any case i think his results are wrong, unless someone posts his code.
