Inter-universal geometry と ABC予想 (応援スレ) 52

[過去ﾛｸﾞ] Inter-universal geometry と ABC予想 (応援スレ) 52 (1002ﾚｽ)
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

212: １３２人目の素数さん [] 2021/02/24(水) 11:06:15.19 ID:PXsEolJh

>>211
つづき

（参考）
https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=11709
（woitブログ）
Not Even Wrong Latest on abc Posted on April 3, 2020 by woit

Peter Scholze says:
April 30, 2020 at 3:32 am

Reading the IUT papers, however, you are presented with some extremely difficult notion of a Hodge theater, together with a highly non-obvious notion of isomorphisms of such: Isomorphisms do not preserve nearly as much structure as you would expect them to, and this is by design as Mochizuki points out. So I find it very hard to “guess” what something like a surrounding “theory” might be. For all I can see, Hodge theaters fit neither into the framework of “structures” as used in the wikipedia entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_(model_theory) you linked to, nor the topos-theoretic framework of Caramello. (Regarding the first one: A “structure” in the sense of model theory has first of all an underlying set. I find it hard to take a Hodge theater and produce some interesting set that is functorial in isomorphisms of Hodge theaters, the problem being the very lax notion of isomorphisms of Hodge theaters.)

However, these long discussions are all about interpretations. Regarding the mathematics proper: I stand by the claim made in our manuscript, and have indicated the proof above.
（終わり）
以上

http://rio2016.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/math/1613784152/212

619: １３２人目の素数さん [] 2021/03/04(木) 15:46:28.40 ID:GswT501p

>>614
維新さん、いやアンチIUTさん、（日常の）ロジックがメタメタですよね

＜論点を整理しましょう＞
論点1.査読はあったのか？
論点2.ショルツェ氏は、最初「Cor3.12までは自明で、Cor3.12の証明が分からない」と言っていた
　がしかし、WoitブログでのDupuy氏との論争で、突然”extremely difficult notion of a Hodge theater”（「ホッジ劇場が超難しい」）とか言い出したよね(>>211)
論点3.ショルツェ氏の方が正しく、IUT側の多数の数学者たちは全員間違い？
論点4．望月IUTが特別扱い？

＜各論点について＞
１）論点1について、
・下記woitブログのOP氏が、初期にIUTレフェリーチームへの参加打診があったが断ったとあります。（なお、OP氏は多分外国人ではないかと思われます）
　つまりは、「the referee team for the IUT papers」なるものが存在し、OP氏は辞退したけれども、査読は行われたであろうことは確かでしょう
（参考）
https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=11723
Why the Szpiro Conjecture is Still a Conjecture
Posted on April 18, 2020 by woit
OP says:
April 18, 2020 at 4:41 pm
I was asked early on to be on the referee team for the IUT papers. I have great respect for Mochizuki’s mathematical talent, and no doubt in the sincerity of his belief that he has a proof of the main result. But I could see that the referees would not only have to check the details of an extremely long work written in a very obscure style (which didn’t provide insightful reasons for confidence in the approach being used).

OP says:
April 18, 2020 at 8:49 pm
Just to clarify: I wasn’t a referee on the IUT papers, but rather was invited to serve as one, and I declined (giving the editorial board my recommendation for how I thought would be best to proceed).

つづく

http://rio2016.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/math/1613784152/619

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

ぬこの手ぬこTOP 0.033s