Mathematician-M.D. claims to have solved the 110-year-old Lindelöf hypothesis

Re:Mathematician-M.D. claims to have solved the 110-year-old... by OskarS on Thursday June 28, 2018 @02:32AM (#17414554)

The thing impendia is referring to there is analytic continuation, which (as mentioned) is a way to extend the domain of a certain set of functions, like the zeta function. It is perfectly rigorous. His/her language was just a short-hand for "don't worry about the details here, but it does work".

Mathematicians aren't stupid, and more than any other profession, they value rigor. They know what they're doing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Mathematician-M.D. claims to have solved the 110-year-old... by taneq on Thursday June 28, 2018 @09:37AM (#17416718)

Rigor in logic but, it seems to me, not often rigor in description. There's a lot of willingness to say "if we change rule X to mean something totally other, then you can do this thing" and then just describe it as "you can do this thing". Sure, but "this thing" now means something different.

[ Parent | on HN ]