20/04/05 01:16:21 stNgDsDJ.net
Not Even Wrongで Peter Woitが、
「論争の的になっている部分の証明で、何で望月の書いたものが正確で完全と彼の側についているのか」と書いている。
The tradition is to keep referee reports confidential, and in this case it’s not clear if breaking the tradition would help.
Much of the work of the referees was surely on parts of the proof other than the controversial Corollary 3.12.
On the controversial part of the proof, they’re siding with Mochizuki that what he has written is correct and complete.
If they have an argument for this that would convince Schole-Stix and others, it would be helpful if that were made public.
This all comes down to the same problem of what is missing here that is needed to justify acceptance of the proof.
それより前の文節でIUTeich の[1][2][3][4]を読んでいることを書いているが、、
モッチー「心の１票」のQ&Aで、自分のサーベイと書いた[Alien]に触れてない。
⇒[Alien] Example 3.11.4.の「∧と∨の誤認」は未だ論じてないね。