September 21st, 2018, 04:55 PM  #11 
Global Moderator Joined: Oct 2008 From: London, Ontario, Canada  The Forest City Posts: 7,935 Thanks: 1129 Math Focus: Elementary mathematics and beyond 
Haha...missed it on the first scan...  pretty sparse article.

September 21st, 2018, 05:18 PM  #12 
Senior Member Joined: Aug 2017 From: United Kingdom Posts: 312 Thanks: 111 Math Focus: Number Theory, Algebraic Geometry  In the past couple of years, he's given a proof that $S^6$ admits no complex structure, and a very short proof of FeitThompson. The consensus seems to be that neither attempt holds up.

September 22nd, 2018, 06:42 AM  #13 
Banned Camp Joined: Mar 2015 From: New Jersey Posts: 1,720 Thanks: 125 
A required format for presentations of this magnitude and significance should be that ALL Axioms, A1,A2..., definitions, D1,D2,.... , and assumed Theorems T1,T2.. be listed first, and every deduction refer to them. Deductions would also be listed throughout the paper P1,P2,P3,.. and subsequent deductions would reference previous deductions where relevant. These would also appear at the beginning in the form, for example: P1, D3, A5, T2 ............ P10, D5, A3, P7 P11, P3 P12, D2,D7,T4,T10 ................ In this way a proof schema would be established for the entire paper which could be systematically checked by numerous people, and points of disagreement could be identified and adjudicated. Such a proof schema is known as zylo's proof schema. 
September 22nd, 2018, 06:51 AM  #14 
Senior Member Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 784 Thanks: 280  
September 22nd, 2018, 07:49 AM  #15 
Banned Camp Joined: Mar 2015 From: New Jersey Posts: 1,720 Thanks: 125 
If I were editor of a math journal, I wouldn't accept a paper, much less read one, not in zylo's format (proof schema).

September 22nd, 2018, 07:53 AM  #16 
Math Team Joined: Dec 2013 From: Colombia Posts: 7,659 Thanks: 2635 Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra  There's two ways of looking at this:

September 23rd, 2018, 03:06 PM  #17 
Senior Member Joined: Feb 2016 From: Australia Posts: 1,801 Thanks: 636 Math Focus: Yet to find out. 
Looks like the event will be streamed live on the Heidelberg forum site: https://www.heidelberglaureateforum.org/event_2018/, in case anyone wants to watch..

September 23rd, 2018, 03:49 PM  #18 
Global Moderator Joined: Dec 2006 Posts: 20,636 Thanks: 2081 
I wonder what odds are available on a flaw being spotted on the same day as the talk.

September 23rd, 2018, 07:27 PM  #19 
Senior Member Joined: Feb 2016 From: Australia Posts: 1,801 Thanks: 636 Math Focus: Yet to find out.  
September 24th, 2018, 03:22 AM  #20 
Newbie Joined: Sep 2018 From: Russia Posts: 1 Thanks: 0  Dr.
I proved RH more that year ago, it is in my arxiv, https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.03827 up to some corrections in calculus ((almost) final version appear tomorrow) it is right proof. I proved the convexity of the square of modulus of zeta function on critical trip. Mr Atiyah many times appear in the in the pictures google search "Blinovsky proved Riemann hypothesis". What will be next  if his proof is wrong (I dot check it)  nothing  if it is also valid  started philosophy that Newton stands on the shoulder of Gians, or something else. Even if I "win", I will not be O, but I will be happy to live next 25 years with my wife Blinovsky Vladimir 

Tags 
hypothesis, proof, riemann 
Search tags for this page 
Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
riemann hypothesis proof?: zeta(s) is never 0 for Re(s)>1/2, flaws? thanks!  jlb  Number Theory  1  January 15th, 2015 12:49 PM 
A proof of Robin's inequality (and so of the Riemann Hypothesis)  Vincenzo Oliva  Number Theory  12  November 27th, 2014 03:14 PM 
Riemann Hypothesis.  mathbalarka  Number Theory  0  October 31st, 2013 12:54 AM 
Proof of Riemann Hypothesis?  eddybob123  Number Theory  18  May 21st, 2013 06:10 PM 
Proof for Riemann hypothesis and more  joexian  Number Theory  5  January 16th, 2013 06:13 AM 