https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.04644nice troll
Clearly uploaded to troII EJMR mathturbators
It looks like the author’s previous work is legit though. Did anyone try to actually read the above paper? Is it 100% nonsense or is there some small percentage of material that’s both correct and interesting?
Because even if the main result is wrong, a connection between MIP^*=RE and the zeta function can be quite interesting.
Will a physicist prove the Riemann hypothesis?
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/ab3de7
Quite remarkable how a problem from number theory corresponds to physics problems.
Freeman Dyson pointed this out a few decades ago, so it's not all that remarkable to those of us who are better informed than basement dweIling mathfan wannabes.
Will a physicist prove the Riemann hypothesis?
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/ab3de7
Quite remarkable how a problem from number theory corresponds to physics problems.Freeman Dyson pointed this out a few decades ago, so it's not all that remarkable to those of us who are better informed than basement dweIling mathfan wannabes.
You're confusing unremarkable with familiar.
Will a physicist prove the Riemann hypothesis?
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/ab3de7
Quite remarkable how a problem from number theory corresponds to physics problems.Freeman Dyson pointed this out a few decades ago, so it's not all that remarkable to those of us who are better informed than basement dweIling mathfan wannabes.
Doesn't matter that Dyson pointed them out because these "links" are still just as vapid
the plot thickens:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.04644v2
Did you read the comments, rtard?
"Comments: All claims made in this article should be regarded as entirely unsubstantiated and the claims other than the statement about zeroes of zeta are likely false. The author was suffering from a temporary psychotic break when writing and posting the article and their actions in this regard were governed by delusional beliefs unrelated to legitimate mathematics"
How many manuscripts claiming to have solved the Riemann hypothesis are uploaded each month on arxiv? Do any of them ever "thicken the plot"?
There are currently 4 teams of people, all well-known and respected, competing towards being the first to have a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis. A proof is in sight in the next few years. Stay tuned!
yes, I went back to my topology textbook (advanced undergrad) and I have a keen eye on proving, among other things, the Riemann Hypothesis. stay tuned
the plot thickens:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.04644v2Did you read the comments, rtard?
"Comments: All claims made in this article should be regarded as entirely unsubstantiated and the claims other than the statement about zeroes of zeta are likely false. The author was suffering from a temporary psychotic break when writing and posting the article and their actions in this regard were governed by delusional beliefs unrelated to legitimate mathematics"
How many manuscripts claiming to have solved the Riemann hypothesis are uploaded each month on arxiv? Do any of them ever "thicken the plot"?
You are right. In this case, as EJMR already correctly guessed, the author of the paper just had some mental issues. Let's leave him alone and move on.
What is Masullo up to now? Is he still in math? Did he head back to Italy or did he get a tech/finance job?
His Linkedin page lists him as a postdoc at Stanford from Oct 2020 - present, though it might not be up to date.
It also appears that AMM made a few minor changes on Linkedin. He used to state "Stanford University PhD 2015-2019". Now it's changed to "2015-2020", perhaps after being exposed by EJMR that he didn't deposit the dissertation until 2020. But even "2015-2020" is not accurate, since he started PhD in 2014.
It's also funny that AMM now added his GPA "4.2/4.0" next to PhD, given that he struggled to pass the qualifying exam.