Re: [PrimeNumbers] news re ABC conjecture
- On 9/12/2012 5:35 PM, James Merickel wrote:
> Phil Carmody has suggested that there are standard texts that are not pertinent in reference.Here's one from the bibliography:
> Phil, would you be so kind as to name these (to facilitate answering the question I have--and others may--of 'rhetoric' in a 'mathematical world')? I don't know the leveling you place on
> this statement. Nor is the 'a couple of these' phrase clear. You may save us some time if this is a form of play. You may push somebody serious onto the ledge with the other already
> serious people to this question of validation. Thank you, if you would. And no offense intended in singling you out (to anyone). I merely wish to know what these books are (whether, now,
> I understand your expression entirely, partly, or not at all; and whether I can quickly understand it or only slowly, if I ever do).
> Yours Truly, James G. Merickel
[DmMn] H. Dym and H. P. McKean, Fourier Series and Integrals, Academic Press (1972).
There are others.
- --- In email@example.com,
Steven Harvey <harvey563@...> wrote:
> http://www.nature.com/news/proof-claimed-for-deep-connection-between-primes-1.11378?WT.ec_id=NEWS-20120911The claimed inequality of "bounded discrepancy classes"
in Theorem A of Paper IV is mind-boggling general;
much wider than ABC. It may take a long time for a few
knowledgeable souls to work through these 4 dense papers.
I am deeply impressed by how hard the maths community
is prepared to work on corporate validation of significant
claims. Here is a recent example:
- --- On Thu, 9/13/12, James Merickel <moralforce120@...> wrote:
> Phil Carmody has suggested that therePerhaps "pertinent" was too weak a word. "an essential or direct precursor" would have been better. For example, Jack pulled out the Fourier Transform one. IIRC, other ones which had a publishing date before the author's first paper caught my eye (Wiles?). There of course may be some relevance, some use, of such papers, but they're more for scene setting than anything else.
> are standard texts that are not pertinent in reference.