mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Miscellaneous Math

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2022-10-27, 01:56   #1
ixfd64
Bemusing Prompter
 
ixfd64's Avatar
 
"Danny"
Dec 2002
California

2·29·43 Posts
Default A new claimed proof of the twin prime conjecture

https://link.springer.com/article/10...25-022-10017-2

Unfortunately, there are at least two major red flags:
  1. The author has made bold claims about other proofs, particularly the strong Goldbach conjecture and the Lenstra–Pomerance–Wagstaff conjecture.
  2. He is also an editor of the journal in which the paper is published, which raises questions about the impartiality.

See also the related Reddit thread: https://old.reddit.com/r/math/commen...cture_was_just
ixfd64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-27, 20:13   #2
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

7·887 Posts
Default

I know next to nothing about the methods of formal logic the author is applying, or claims to be applying.

I tried reading through the Goldbach paper. I couldn't figure out where he was using the hypothesis that his variables were prime. I remember one of my profs saying something like, "You should always worry if you're proving something without using the hypotheses."

My suspicion is that the methods the author is using simply do not apply to the questions he is claiming to address.
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-30, 21:32   #3
ixfd64
Bemusing Prompter
 
ixfd64's Avatar
 
"Danny"
Dec 2002
California

1001101111102 Posts
Default

Looks like the paper has been retracted: https://twitter.com/highergeometer/s...99921524080640
ixfd64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-31, 20:18   #4
Dr Sardonicus
 
Dr Sardonicus's Avatar
 
Feb 2017
Nowhere

141018 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixfd64 View Post
Looks like the paper has been retracted: https://twitter.com/highergeometer/s...99921524080640
I found the announcement posted in plain text, so I could copy-paste it:
Quote:
Public announcement

Recently two articles on the applications of Rasiowa-Sikorski Lemma to arithmetic were published online in Studia Logica without proper examination and beyond reasonable standards of scholarly rigor. As it turned out, they contained an irreparable mistake and, consequently, have been retracted from the journal's website. The papers will not appear in print.

I want to thank all our readers who alerted us to this unfortunate incident. I feel responsible for the reputation damage caused by these publications, and I want to offer my sincere apologies to the scientific community and the author.

Studia Logica editors have examined the journal's review procedure to ensure that a similar situation will not happen again.

Jacek Malinowski
Studia Logica
Editor-in-Chief
So, if the Goldbach conjecture and Mersenne primes paper have been "retracted from the journal's website," why was I able to download them a few minutes ago? (The Twin Primes paper, too).
Dr Sardonicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ONCE AGAIN: a seemingly fresh proof of the Twin Prime Conjecture.... NOT rudy235 Miscellaneous Math 4 2022-05-03 02:52
Claimed proof of the ABC conjecture (Zha, 2009) R.D. Silverman Math 6 2019-04-22 00:03
Twin Prime Conjecture Proof Steve One Miscellaneous Math 53 2019-03-18 00:34
Proof of the twin prime conjecture (NOT!) Awojobi Miscellaneous Math 40 2019-02-10 16:36
A proof for the Twin Prime Conjecture Carl Fischbach Miscellaneous Math 7 2009-06-24 05:52

All times are UTC. The time now is 08:01.


Fri Jan 27 08:01:38 UTC 2023 up 162 days, 5:30, 0 users, load averages: 1.77, 1.21, 1.00

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔