Thread 16829021

A pop-science journalist known as James Douglas Boyd has recently spent a lot of time interacting with Mochizuki and others at RIMS working in anabelian geometry. He published his interviews with Mochizuki a few weeks ago.

However, esteemed Professor Mochizuki Shinichi is NOT AT ALL happy with the results, writing
>It is difficult for me to recall any time in my career as a mathematician when I experienced a comparable level of overt fraud/duplicity/charlatanism in a professional situation, and it has left me in a state of [math]\textit{deep shock}[/math].
https://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~motizuki/IUT-report-2025-10.pdf
In particular, he claims the J.D. Boyd he interacted with was "nothing more than a cynical work of fiction" (see pic rel).

Mochizuki further emphasizes EMS Code of Practice (EMSCOP) and argues journalism/story-telling (and some preprints) lack the professional accountability apparatus of peer-reviewed mathematics. Boyd’s work violates prior assurances and democratic norms (rule of law, due process, burden of proof).
He then comments on the Scholze-Stix (SS) manuscript:
- The SS manuscript is unpublished, contains no precise statement or proof relating its simplified set-up to IUT
- SS declined further discussion after 2018; calls it a “mystery” why anyone asserts a logical relationship between their simplification and IUT
- SS explicitly did not contest IUT’s multiradial representation (IUT III, Thm 3.11); rather, they claimed no path to diophantine consequences.

>>16829021 (OP)
Holy shit, this whiny faggot should stop complaining and get a life. No one even cares now if you proved a + b = c dude.

Mochizuki mentions Lean-style computer formalization as the "best hope" for "bridging the gap between the social/political dynamics surrounding social acceptance of mathematical (or, more generally, scientific) ideas and mathematical truth," while noting it won’t persuade those insisting the circle is a square, formally or otherwise ("faith en masse").
He writes:
>In this context, I am reminded of the (perhaps humorously anachronistic) phenomenon of “flat-earthers”, as well as the following stories that I heard when I was a graduate student in the late 1980’s to early 1990’s at Princeton University:
>· some local government in the United States of America passed a law to the effect that, within its local jurisdiction, π (i.e., the length of the cirumference of a circle of unit radius) is equal to 3;
> · some survey of the general population of the United States of America found that a surprising percentage of the population believe that one-third is greater than one-half (i.e., “ 1/3 > 1/2 ”), that is to say, since three is greater than two.
>In either of these two cases, it seems highly unlikely that presenting a Lean-style computer formalization of the irrationality of π or of the inequality 1/2 > 1/3 to the people involved would result in a change in the minds or hearts of these people.

Below are the specific technical rebuttals to J.D. Boyd's article:

>On alleged intrinsic contradictions (FA1)
“There is no contradiction in the set-up of the log-theta-lattice of IUT.” Claims that Lean is “fundamentally incapable” of checking this are “entirely inconceivable,” and the idea that validity is “subjective” is “entirely absurd.”

>On labels/universes (FA2)
The quote “provocative/sensationalist/exoticist/apocalyptic narrative” about “suspending contradictions with labels” has “absolutely nothing to do” with reality. IUT uses standard labels for distinct objects; universes appear precisely as in SGA1 and derived functors; given Lean4’s handling of SGA1/derived functors, there is “no fundamental obstruction whatsover” to formalizing IUT. It will take years; so did everything else of substance.

>On “vulnerability” to label-removal
The critique “reflects a fundamental misunderstanding” since “no nontrivial set-theoretic mathematical structure … is ‘robust’ … to ‘arbitrary label-removals’.” Identifying 2 and 3 in N does wonders for arithmetic; alas, not the good kind.

>On set-theoretic paradoxes (FA3)
“It must [be] stated categorically” that prime-strips/theta-links do not trigger paradoxes; the issue is incompatibility with additive structure, leading to multiplicative or group-theoretic frameworks. “[math]\in[/math]-loops” are philosophical analogies.

>On splitting off an “anabelian core” from abc
Attempts to separate the anabelian/Teichmüller part from the abc application are “mathematically meaningless,” indeed “nothing more than a meaningless self-contradiction.” It is, inconveniently, the same mathematics.

>On taste-policing and ersatz IUTs
The practice of rewriting IUT to please outsiders is “particularly pernicious,” producing “logically unrelated fabricated versions … entirely devoid of any meaningful mathematical content.”

based mochizuki as always

mochizuki should start a podcast or something
I bet he has no idea of how many autists love him around the world

it will take asi to redeem mochizuki

>>16829028
>>· some local government in the United States of America passed a law to the effect that, within its local jurisdiction, π (i.e., the length of the cirumference of a circle of unit radius) is equal to 3;
How the fuck is the US a real country?

>>16829075
Lol dude's credibility just dropped from a small fraction to zero after publishing that.

>>16829075
>How the fuck is the US a real country?
It isn't. It's a complete Masonic fabrication. It has no people or history to speak of.

This might be Mochizuki's best schizopost so far, he's calling out every single critic of his. Pic rel is him seething over this blog post
https://thehighergeometer.wordpress.com/2021/11/22/an-exercise-in-colimits/

>>16829047
imagine mochizuki debating wildberger on 0.999...!=1

Based Mochizuki as usual

>>16829021 (OP)
Mochizuki WON

>>16829021 (OP)
Don't talk to journos, Mochizuki-sama - idk any IUTT but I do know you can never hate them enough.

>>16829021 (OP)
Never trust journalists, especially pop basedence ones

Sorry but how did Mochizuki fall for this? As far as I can tell, J.D. Boyd is some weeb programmer that lives in Japan with no mathematical background

>>16829456
I can understand Mochizuki's frustration when the pop sci articles on IUTT are literally pic rel
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a64984787/iut-alien-language/

>>16829021 (OP)
honestly based, wish pop sci journos would get called out on their clickbait trash more often

>>16829051
Mochizuki will help cscucks reach ASI in the next 5 years, he's already taken an interest in Lean and AI

>>16829021 (OP)
based

>>16829021 (OP)
Mochizuki is an e-celeb that panders to incels

bump

>>16836402
What more do you want to know? He's so ass blasted by American greatness that he literally published an easily-debunked urban legend in defense of his "trust me bro" theorem. At this point he's completely disqualified from having an opinion about anything related to the abc conjecture.

>>16833908
Trvthnvke

>>16836536
interesting how you focus on Mochizuki's off-topic tangent over the state of burgerland than his technical arguments

>>16836561
My last hope for his proof was appeal to authority. His tangent shattered that hope.

>>16829753
that's legitimately fucking insane. the proof of the geometric langlands conjecture is also incomprehensible to most people, when are the pop-sci articles dropping calling that an alien language too? I seriously don't get what even the point of such articles is, they only mislead and aren't particularly interesting either.

>>16829091
what's your problem with celsius?

>>16829075
They worship muh freedom above reason or anything else for that matter. A lard will proudly exclaim how pi is 2 in his neck o da woods because they have da rights and freedumbs to vote for pi to be 2. The notion of objective truth eludes the lard on the account of constant jewish brainwashing, which starts as early as school where the lard is socially stigmatized for not praying to the US flag every morning.

>>16829240
But they both believe 0.99.. = 1. Wildberger just doesn't consider entities outside of Q as numbers and instead thinks of them as functions

>>16838156
You seem to be new to the science journalism business. These people have been trained as science anthropologists. They look at scientists as though they were different tribes with their own social customs and hierarchies. There is some truth to this, but it is not journalism about science; it is journalism about the sociology of scientists.

>>16840420
NTA but isn't your description a bit generous? I thought he considered almost every entity in Q to also not be a number.

>>16840389
>>16840405
Celsius is cool; our thermometers have both scales. European thermometer manufacturers try to dick ride the dual scale American aesthetic but since Brussels rightfully banned C/F thermometers under the (valid) argument that Europeans are, as a rule, too illiterate to deal with a second set of marks, which would lead to millions of hypothermia deaths as they see the mercury at 20º and go out for picnics without coats. Then, as a social reform pursuant to the great migrant crisis, the sale or manufacture of C/F thermometers was upgraded to a felony hate crime due to the disproportional systemic violence it targets at Africans, who are even less literate than Europeans.

>>16840459
Nobody cares about Fahrenheit, it's not important to learn. Same for shit like mmHg