← Back to context

Comment by RetroTechie

1 day ago

A more practical approach:

If a paper/proof is impossible to understand by humans, it could be considered useless (irrelevant) for most intents & purposes.

Regardless how interesting or valid looking, might as well be gibberish pulled from /dev/random. Until:

a) Written down in a form that humans can understand. And/or

b) Turned into practical applications that are demonstrated to work.

In other words: safe to ignore, until a) and/or b) occurs.

Well, yes, in theory.

If any of those papers were sent to a scientific conference, they would have been rejected as inscrutable gibberish: "resubmit once the presentation is significantly improved".

Yet, mathematicians spend their time trying to understand them.

Real life prisoner's dilemma.