Stream: Miscellaneous

Topic: 7 pages, 4 colors, allegedly


view this post on Zulip Paolo Giarrusso (Dec 21 2022 at 19:33):

https://twitter.com/neil_calkin/status/1605577231840948226

Earlier this year I excitedly tweeted about a new proof of the 4 color theorem: perhaps prematurely. They've now posted a paper on the arxiv: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.09835.pdf I have *not* checked the details, but it is there for all to read.

- Neil Calkin (@neil_calkin)

Or how I read it on IRC:

6:44 PM <leah2> finally classical mathematics caught up! https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.09835.pdf

Background: https://twitter.com/bwebste/status/1540893240337080321

@JulietteBruce12 @AndresECaicedo1 @neil_calkin I think it was announced at this conference: https://sites.google.com/view/combinatorial-enumeration/home (of course, I remember this because I was in K-W and did not go to the conference), so that would make it exactly one month.

- Ben Webster (@bwebste)

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Dec 21 2022 at 19:34):

hmm, no Gonthier cite?

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Dec 21 2022 at 19:39):

looks like they push everything into real analysis, so probably not easy to check more formally

view this post on Zulip Paolo Giarrusso (Dec 22 2022 at 05:08):

Eh, it's short enough they can first poke potential holes the old way — step 0 of formalization: https://mathstodon.xyz/@VinceVatter/109554954153310707 https://twitter.com/littmath/status/1605730144986988545

@NoahJSnyder @HigherGeometer Independently, I think section 4 doesn’t make sense — what is the induction in 4.2 trying to prove? If it proves all graphs in Q are 4-colorable this already implies the 4-color theorem, since every planar graph is a subgraph of a graph in Q.

- Daniel Litt (@littmath)

view this post on Zulip Paolo Giarrusso (Dec 22 2022 at 05:09):

Oh, we don't have mathstodon previews


Last updated: Apr 21 2024 at 02:41 UTC