>>567 & >>575

関連
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:yaBRI6rvLroJ:https://twitter.com/math_jin+&cd=1&hl=ja&ct=clnk&gl=jp
math_jin
Apr 25
More
Last week a review of the Mochizuki IUT papers appeared at Math Reviews, written by Mohamed Saidi. His discussion of the critical part of the proof is limited to:
"Theorem 3.11 in Part III is somehow reinterpreted in Corollary 3.12 of the…#IUTABC
https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=12775 …

https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=12775
Not Even Wrong woit
Various and Sundry
Posted on April 18, 2022 by woit
Last week a review of the Mochizuki IUT papers appeared at Math Reviews, written by Mohamed Saidi. His discussion of the critical part of the proof is limited to:

tulpoeid says:
April 24, 2022 at 1:55 am
About IUT, what I’ve been trying to understand is if that work has other merits on its own.
Ie. even if the proof of Corollary 3.12 is wrong, so the overall proof is wrong, does Mochizuki’s vast construct contribute to math in some other collateral way?
If I’m right this has happened before with proofs that turned out to be wrong, and I’ll be genuinely puzzled if such complex work has nothing else to offer and all its value is hanging on a single point.

Hermann Vile says:
April 24, 2022 at 2:49 pm
Mochizuki’s latest endeavor seems to be regularly updating this document (https://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/Essential%20Logical%20Structure%20of%20Inter-universal%20Teichmuller%20Theory.pdf), which is now 140 pages. I doubt this will convince anyone; if anything, his writing has become even more turgid and depressing.
@tulpoeid: No, there is *nothing* useful in IUT. If there was, it would’ve been successfully extracted by ambitious young people in the ten (!) years since the IUT papers were first posted.
https://twitter.com/5chan_nel (5ch newer account)