/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12166435]

Is he right, bros?

[Anonymous No.12166436]

>>12166435
Not with that hairline.

[Anonymous No.12166441]

>>12166436
look at his card though, pure kino

[Anonymous No.12166447]

>>12166435
Yes
>>12166436
Shut the fuck up <130 IQ normalfag.

[Anonymous No.12167516]

Pretty sure he was proven wrong and all he had to say was that the peers were not smart enough to understand his work.

[Anonymous No.12167518]

>>12166435
No.
>>12166447
Shut the fuck up <100 IQ normalfag.

[Anonymous No.12167521]

>>12166435
He is absolutely right.

[Anonymous No.12167538]

>>12167518
Shut the fuck up <70 IQ normal fag.

[Anonymous No.12167555]

>>12167538
Shut the fuck up <50 IQ normalfag.

[Anonymous No.12167569]

>>12166441
how do i become an inter universal geometer bros

[El Arcón No.12167610]

Mochi's "Hodge theater" is just my MCM unit cell dressed in inaccessible language

[El Arcón No.12167613]

When Hairer stole it, what he just won $3M for, he called it a "regularity structure."

[El Arcón No.12167616]

>>12167610
>>12167613
both of them followed the program of Ashtekar to take what I wrote and "improve it" by dressing in unhelpful technical jargon.

[Anonymous No.12167618]

>>12167616
>unhelpful technical jargon
It's called mathematics, Tooker.

[El Arcón No.12167620]

[Anonymous No.12167627]

>>12167610
>Mochi's "Hodge theater" is just my MCM unit cell dressed in inaccessible language

This is great Tooker! All you have to do is then publish your proof of the ABC conjecture in your own clearer language and you'll get all the credit! Hurry up, man! You could become a world-famous mathematician overnight and the work is already cut out for you! Universities will pay you hundreds of thousands to teach in their lecture halls. You will be one wealthy man. Probably greater than Terence Tao if this is true. And Tao makes 400k so imagine what you'll be making!

[El Arcón No.12167635]

>>12167618
I agree with your assertion unhelpful jargon can be called mathematics. Do you agree with my assertion that what they did taking my accessible mathematics and dressing it unhelpful jargon without attribution is called unethical?

[Anonymous No.12167639]

>>12167538
Shut the fuck up <40 IQ normalfag.

[Anonymous No.12167640]

>>12167639
Shut the fuck up <10 IQ normalfag.

[Anonymous No.12167641]

>>12167627
>>12167620
>>12167616
>>12167613
>>12167610
Seriously Tooker, if you don't type up your manuscript and submit it by tomorrow morning 9AM I'll do it myself (I've got it all typed up and ready to go) and I won't be giving you any credit when I win my Fields medal.

[El Arcón No.12167643]

>>12167627
I already published my solution to RH. It didn't do anything for me, professionally. Also, you seem to be missing the point that Mochi's solution to ABC was just an application of the IUT which was a rebranding of my unit cell, without attribution.

[Anonymous No.12167645]

>>12166447
>>12167518
>>12167538
>>12167555
>>12167639
>>12167640
130 -> 100 -> 70 -> 50 -> 40 -> 10

Why the inconsistency bros

[Anonymous No.12167648]

>>12167645
Okay let's start over.
Shut the fuck up <250 IQ normalfag

[Anonymous No.12167655]

>>12167643
>you seem to be missing the point that Mochi's solution to ABC was just an application of the IUT which was a rebranding of my unit cell

But you don't get it. IUT is not widely accepted yet. If you were to rewrite that proof into something more readable using your unit cell then you would be recognized as the person who solved IUT. If you managed to do this, you would become famous overnight. DO IT TOOKER. DO IT NOW. DO NOT WASTE ANY MORE TIME.

Any day now Mochizuki could repent and come out with a better written proof. It won't be soon, but it will come eventually. He already did a simplification of his proof, which was still very obtuse, so a second further simplification could be in the works. DO IT NOW.

[Anonymous No.12167664]

>>12167648
Shut the fuck up <220 IQ normalfag

[Anonymous No.12167666]

>>12167664
Shut the fuck up <190 IQ normalfag

[El Arcón No.12167680]

>>12167655
but IUT is garbage though. the unit cell is the good stuff.

[El Arcón No.12167682]

[Anonymous No.12167684]

>>12167680
I know! Just rewrite Mochi's proof of ABC into unit cell notation. It's free money at this point.

[El Arcón No.12167698]

>>12167684
It seems like you are suggesting that the main thing Michi has done by stealing my idea is to solve ABC. My contention is that the main thing he has done to devise IUT with ABC merely being an application. Do you disagree with me?

[El Arcón No.12167700]

>>12167684
It seems like you are suggesting that the main thing Michi has done by stealing my idea is to solve ABC. My contention is that the main thing he has done is to devise IUT with ABC merely being an application. Do you disagree with me?

[Anonymous No.12167702]

>>12167698
>Do you disagree with me?
I don't disagree. But I'm thinking in practical terms. No one cares about IUT, but ABC is a world-famous problem. If you solve it in clear terms, you get famous. We are talking an immediate fields medal right here.

[El Arcón No.12167714]

>>12167702
My enemies have already burned through so many years of my life that I am now disqualified from ever winning a fields. Furthermore, I already solved what used to be called, and still is called, the most important unsolved problem in mathematics. The solution didn't do anything for me, and I did it with the theory of functions which is by far superior to IUT. I think if solving RH didn't do anything for me, then solving ABC that no one give a shit about wouldn't either.

[Anonymous No.12167727]

>>12167714
Tooker, don't think about the past. You know your armies are coming soon, so what would you lose with one last paper? One final paper in an area completely away from RH so that none of those tired criticisms apply to it. ABC is your golden ticket.

Think about this: If western mathematics attack your proof and do not give you your accolades, then you can just claim that your proof is an adaptation of Mochi's proof and then you will instead get praise from Japan. Imagine yourself fucking a tight japanese bitch right after cashing your 400k/year check. Then calling her a chink whore while you shoot cum into her face. This could be your life.

[El Arcón No.12167732]

Fractional Distance: The Topology of the Real Number Line with Applications to the Riemann Hypothesis
https://vixra.org/abs/1906.0237
https://gofile.io/d/q1RoYc

>

Recent analysis has uncovered a broad swath of rarely considered real numbers called real numbers in the neighborhood of infinity. Here we extend the catalog of the rudimentary analytical properties of all real numbers by defining a set of fractional distance functions on the real number line and studying their behavior. The main results of are (1) to prove with modest axioms that some real numbers are greater than any natural number, (2) to develop a technique for taking a limit at infinity via the ordinary Cauchy definition reliant on the classical epsilon-delta formalism, and (3) to demonstrate an infinite number of non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function in the neighborhood of infinity. We define numbers in the neighborhood of infinity as Cartesian products of Cauchy equivalence classes of rationals. We axiomatize the arithmetic of such numbers, prove all the operations are well-defined, and then make comparisons to the similar axioms of a complete ordered field. After developing the many underling foundations, we present a basis for a topology.

[El Arcón No.12167737]

>>12167727
>don't think about the past.
This is not good advice.

[Anonymous No.12167741]

>>12167737
Tooker, what if you publish under a pseudonym. And reveal it was you, Jonathan W. Tooker, after your work is recognized?

[Anonymous No.12167743]

Didn't Scholze prove him to be a quack?

[Anonymous No.12167750]

>>12167743
yes, but he's still trying to get it accepted and has some real pull in the jap math community. this shit is gonna go on for years

[Anonymous No.12167850]

望月新一の安否確認情報


2020年08月04日 23:00現在: 元気にやっています。
所在地: 京都府
Safety Confirmation Information for
Shinichi Mochizuki


As of 04 August 2020, 23:00: I'm doing fine.
Location: Kyoto Prefecture, Japan

[Anonymous No.12167861]

>>12167610
everyone's stealing your ideas Tooker, crazy

[Anonymous No.12167876]

>>12167743
no
dont believe Scholzes cult of personality

[Anonymous No.12167925]

>>12167743
Scholze is himself a quack

[El Arcón No.12167926]

>>12167741
I tried making a Twitter one time with the pseudonym Fred Jenkins. Then they made a movie with Fred Jenkins in it to point out how absolutely fucking retarded it would be to think I'm fooling anyone with anything I could do. My strength is not in my ability to deceive, but rather in desire to tell the truth. So, I think if I tried to publish under a pseudonym, I would get the same fake rejection predicate.

[El Arcón No.12167929]

>>12167861
Yes, but how else would I know which people to exterminate if not for the wrongs done against me? How could I have that knowledge miraculously? My belief is that I have chosen to transmit this information to myself via first hand experiences, and that this is the only possible way I could have done it.

[Anonymous No.12167936]

>>12167666
Not gonna respond to what is clearly black magic, begone you demon

[Anonymous No.12167940]

>>12166435
what are the implications

[Anonymous No.12167963]

>>12167714
used to believe it was unironic shitposting
but just some deranged pseud

[El Arcón No.12167991]

Anyone who says, "I didn't do the attribution for such and such a reason, and actually all of my work is inspired by Tooker's work (which was inspired by a very long list of previous researchers)," then I will have a look at what that reason is. Who is in a better position to praise me than the people who did immediately recognize the value of my work? However, if the reason was malicious, as I suspect, then being in that praise-ready position is not a good place to be. I would like to know the reason, however. I've wondered many times if Mochi is making fun of the tension in my neck and shoulders with this pic he used on his faculty page.

[El Arcón No.12168008]

>>12167618
I have an anecdote, or an allegory, about inaccessible jargon. In software development, large development tasks are divided among software architects and software developers, which is to say they are divided between the big picture guys and the code monkeys. Here is the point I will make with this analogy: Architects get paid a lot more than coders, and it is not even required for the architect to know they syntax of the language in which the architecture will be implemented. Architects are relatively senior, and coders are relatively junior. Architects are often expert coders, but this is not required at all for architecture piece and is more a feature of them having matriculate through the coder tier before being promoted into the architecture tier. In IT, everyone knows that the architecture piece is the main thing and that once architecture is in place, anyone can do the implementation. In math and physics, however, there is a persistent (and fraudulent) zeitgeist such that the syntax of a given language is actually the important piece, and the architecture piece is simply thing that any retard could have done. That's not right. The truth is: the bottleneck to forward progress is always coming up with new ideas. It does irritate me GREATLY, it vexes me even, when people try to place the work of the code monkey on a higher pedestal than the work of the architect. Everyone in the know knows that this is not how it really is, but for outsiders they are able to trick them into thinking that, for instance, someone actually creating a website is a bigger accomplishment than someone having the idea to connect computers over networks.

Pic related: Weinstein also pretty much stole my theory calling "Geometric Unity" just a few months after I wrote >>12167680 Geometric Cosmology.

[Anonymous No.12168378]

>"oh boy, 8 updates on this thread, i wonder what they said"
>half of them are tooker spazzing out

[Anonymous No.12168437]

>>12167700
Mathematicians don't really care about IUT or your unit cell, they care about ABC.
If IUT is really equivalent to your unit cell, you should use it to solve ABC and get recognition.

[Anonymous No.12168463]

>>12167926
>Then they made a movie with Fred Jenkins in it to point out how absolutely fucking retarded it would be to think I'm fooling anyone with anything I could do. My strength is not in my ability to deceive, but rather in desire to tell the truth. So, I think if I tried to publish under a pseudonym, I would get the same fake rejection predicate.
You picked a really generic name and it appeared in a film. That is just a coincidence, it isn't the powers that be telling you not to publish under a pseudonym.

[El Arcón No.12168524]

>>12168437
>Mathematicians don't really care about IUT or your unit cell, they care about ABC.
This is wrong. Mochi claims to have solved ABC precisely because he cared so very much about my unit cell, and Hairer just won $3M for caring enough about it to write several papers, one of which is almost 200 pages, and physicists care about it as well: such as Weinstein, Ashtekat, Lewnadowski, Engle, and many others having names of which I am not yet aware.

>you should use it to solve ABC and get recognition.
If recognition is something that could be "gotten" then I would get it. As it is, in fact, recognition is something that can be given. Later, when i control the apparatus of violence, then I can demand recognition, and effectively "get" it that way, but really I would only be convincing people to give it to me. Furthermore, if my solution to "the most important unsolved problem in mathematics" was DOA, then I presume my hypothetical solution to "the most important unsolved problem in Diophantine analysis" would have a similar reception.

>>12168463
>That is just a coincidence
How were you able to rule out the case in which it was not a coincidence? I think your main interest in having submit a manuscript under a pseudonym is that after I am denied in the same wronglful way i have been previously, you can say, "huhu bruh do u even be srs rite nao? dis nigga yoose a fake name en still aint shheeeit."

[Anonymous No.12168662]

>>12168524
>>Mathematicians don't really care about IUT or your unit cell, they care about ABC.
>This is wrong. Mochi claims to have solved ABC precisely because he cared so very much about my unit cell, and Hairer just won $3M for caring enough about it to write several papers, one of which is almost 200 pages, and physicists care about it as well: such as Weinstein, Ashtekat, Lewnadowski, Engle, and many others having names of which I am not yet aware.
you just said "this is wrong" and then proved him right

[El Arcón No.12168701]

>>12168662
>you just said "this is wrong" and then proved him right
you just said I proved him right when I did no such thing