[過去ﾛｸﾞ] Inter-universal geometry と ABC予想 (応援スレ) 45 (1002ﾚｽ)

Inter-universal geometry と ABC予想 (応援スレ) 45 http://rio2016.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/math/1588552720/

上下前次1-新
通常表示 512ﾊﾞｲﾄ分割 ﾚｽ栞
抽出解除 ﾚｽ栞

---

このｽﾚｯﾄﾞは過去ﾛｸﾞ倉庫に格納されています｡
次ｽﾚ検索 歴削→次ｽﾚ 栞削→次ｽﾚ 過去ﾛｸﾞﾒﾆｭｰ

---

41: 現代数学の系譜 雑談 ◆e.a0E5TtKE [] 2020/05/04(月) 20:08:00 ID:ncpDqOGk woitブログで、David Robertsは、ショルツ先生にバッサリ切られているぞｗ（＾＾； https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=11709&cpage=2#comments Latest on abc Posted on April 3, 2020 by woit (抜粋) David Roberts says: April 15, 2020 at 2:45 am @W gosh, thanks! Suppose you take the same argument and present it in two different languages ? one, the standard categorical language, and two, Mochizuki’s language where distinct copies of an isomorphic object are relevant for colimits and other categorical constructions. Assuming no other knowledge of what the argument actually is or how it is written, which language is more likely to conceal a subtle error in calculations or other mistake, and which language is more likely to make such mistakes easier to see? This is tricky: it depends who’s reading it. Who are you envisaging seeing mistakes? I can’t imagine (ignoring the fact this is IUT and tremendously baroque) that someone who’s had a decade of practice with their own idiosyncratic style of working would make mistakes more frequently that someone using the language of the majority, all things being equal, apart from the fact the latter person has more potential external checks and balances. This latter point I think can’t be overemphasised. Andrew Wiles was still speaking the language of his community by the time he emerged with his (first attempt at a) proof of FLT, and even engaged the help of someone else to try to check the subtle parts of the argument before that. This hasn’t happened here… つづく http://rio2016.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/math/1588552720/41

42: 現代数学の系譜 雑談 ◆e.a0E5TtKE [] 2020/05/04(月) 20:08:38 ID:ncpDqOGk >>41 つづき A bigger problem is the rigid commitment to definitions/structures that are explicitly admitted as being far more general than necessary (*cough* Frobenioids *cough*). This increases the friction for potential eyes on the IUT papers, if you’ll permit me a worrying metaphor mix. https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=11709#comments Peter Scholze says: April 15, 2020 at 4:31 pm Finally a short answer to David Roberts’ last message: I highly doubt your sentiment that the possibility of doing mistakes is not correlated with how well your language is adapted to the mathematics at hand. (引用終り) 以上 http://rio2016.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/math/1588552720/42

---

ﾒﾓ帳

(0/65535文字)

---

上下前次1-新書関写板覧索設栞歴

---

ｽﾚ情報 赤ﾚｽ抽出 画像ﾚｽ抽出 歴の未読ｽﾚ AAｻﾑﾈｲﾙ

---

Google検索

Wikipedia

---

ぬこの手 ぬこTOP 0.192s*