Number Theorist May Have Proposed a Solution to the Landau-Siegel Zeros Conjecture (Mathematician Who Solved Prime-Number Riddle Claims)

Phys.org ^ | https://phys.org/news/2022-11-theorist-solution-landau-siegel-zeros-conjecture.html#:~:text=Mathemat | Bob Yirka

[TTFX]

You can write an extremely detailed proof that can be verified by a computer. It could also be verified by humans even without understanding it, like a computer does.

[LibWhacker]

a very long proof, 111 pages

Sum Ting Wong. Never seen a proof that long.

[LibWhacker]

Other mathematicians have to confirm it.

[103198]

Go Boilers!

[Chode]

but i thought primes were good or bad don’t remember which pertaining to both

[LibWhacker]

And even then, they don't "prove" the proof is correct.

Every once in a while something pops up that claims there is a mistake in some old, well established theorem. But I don't think I've ever heard of even one of those claims being confirmed.

But you never know for certain. It's possible, however unlikely.

After centuries of all the world's greatest mathematicians accepting a proof, you'd almost have to be crazy to question it.

[muir_redwoods]

See “Uncle Petrose and the Goldbach Conjecture”

The Goldbach Conjecture states that every even natural number greater than 2 is the sum of two primes.

Now prove it and collect your Nobel

[Tymesup]

Correct, there are an infinite number of primes.

If there were a finite set of primes, one could multiply all of them, and add one to the product. The result would not be divisible by any of these primes, so it would be a new prime.

[Tymesup]

Andrew Wiles’ proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem was 129 pages long. His original proof had an error.

[bosco24]

“The Goldbach Conjecture states that every even natural number greater than 2 is the sum of two primes.

Now prove it and collect your Nobel”

I think it would be easier to show a case that it doesn’t hold.
So far I’m up to 15=(13+2). The conjecture holds so far but I’ll keep you posted.

[TTFX]

Want to guess up to what number people verified it using computers?

[muir_redwoods]

Even numbers, 15 doesn’t count.

For example, 22=11+11 or 38=37+1 or 100=93+7

[LibWhacker]

I wonder if it’s possible, in theory, for a proof to be infinitely long?

[LibWhacker]

Oops, dumb question. I just realized there are such theorems and came up with a trivial one (that every odd positive integer greater than or equal to 3 is the sum of 1 plus a positive integer... Proof:
3=2+1
5=4+1
7=6+1
.
.
.
qed

[Scrambler Bob]

… an infinite number of primes that differ by 2.

Yeah, I was going to ask if these pairs qualify:

1 and 3
3 and 5
5 and 7

and infinity is really, really big, and has lots of pairs.

PS I don’t think 9 is prime.

[TTFX]

11 and 13

59 and 61

[ShadowAce]

The problem with 111 page proofs, is how do you prove the proof is correct?

Well, that's easy.

If you stopped at 110 pages, it would be incomplete.

[bosco24]

“Even numbers, 15 doesn’t count.”

WHAT!! Odd numbers do not count?

I made it up to 17 (conjure failed) and thought I had won the Noble Prize for sure. Okay then, back to work and now I’m up to 554=(457+97).

[TTFX]

11 fails.

[bosco24]

“11 fails”

Hmm. Let me check -—. By golly you are correct but unfortunately for you, I found and publicly disclosed the proof that the conjure does not stand for the number 17 before you disclosed that another odd number (11) that also fails the conjure. Therefore, if the conjure had included odd numbers, the Noble prize would have been mine.