/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11185175

22KiB, 455x343, todd function.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 05:59:17 2019 No.11185175 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11185191 >>11185201 >>11185488

Why has no one actually debunked Atiyah's proof of the Riemann theorem? Every mathematician I've seen just kind of brushes it off.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 06:10:50 No.11185189 Report

Quoted By:

there isn't anything to debunk

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 06:11:45 No.11185191 Report

Quoted By: >>11185201 >>11185466

>>11185175
My pretty poor understanding is that the proof is not incorrect.
This leads me to the conclusion that the result of the "proof" isn't sufficient to call the rienann hypothesis true.

As a thought exercise, imagine defining a set of axioms such that RH is true.
Would anyone be interested in that proof?
I could construct a set of axioms so there is only one non-trivial zero, and it lies on the critical strip. I don't think anyone would award me a prize

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 06:11:47 No.11185193 Report

Quoted By:

>posts 22kb image file
Okay faggot

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 06:12:38 No.11185194 Report

Quoted By:

eh, how is this useful in real life?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 06:14:32 No.11185201 Report

Quoted By: >>11185461 >>11185466

>>11185175
Further to this point >>11185191
If the picture you posted is true. It simply shows RH is not false; but it hasn't shown RH is true. RH truth may be independent from the usual axioms.

As an example, look up the continuum hypothesis.
The usual axioms + Axiom A = CH true
The usual axioms + axiom B = CH false
This leads to the conclusion that CH is independent of the usual axioms

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 09:23:06 No.11185461 Report

Quoted By: >>11186512

>>11185201
doesn't that mean that proof by contradiction is not a proof? Is the square root of 2 irrational?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 09:26:49 No.11185466 Report

Quoted By: >>11186512

>>11185191
>>11185201
I think this is right. Atiyah's proof isn't in ZFC so it's ultimately not that consequential.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 09:51:53 No.11185488 Report

Quoted By:

>>11185175

atiyah was an "authority" and a well liked old man

why would anybody risk their reputation by shitting on a dead old man?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 19:04:12 No.11186244 Report

Quoted By:

Doesn't a part of the proof imply some ridiculous shit like 1=2, before concluding the supposed proof by contradiction? It doesn't take much to see that Atiyah's last presentation was just his last senile breath spouting senile statements. He was a great mathematician and it's beautiful that he died doing what he loved 'till his last day, but you can't really defend his "proof" as such.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 29 Nov 2019 21:08:10 No.11186512 Report

Quoted By:

>>11185461
I don't know anon. I don't know enough mathematics. Regardless proof by contradiction seems to be a case where it has to be one or the other. I'd guess this anon is correct >>11185466, though i have no way of knowing theyre right, that atiyahs proof is not in any axiomatic system we care about.

Like i said, i could solve RH in an axiomatic system that produces only one non-trivial zero; but that wouldn't be a proof of RH in zfc

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches