[octachron]

Mathematicians are more interested in the gap in our proof framework.

Like stated in the articles, many "interesting" constants appearing in mathematics feels like obviously irrational. However, proofs that they are irrational have been eluding mathematicians for centuries.

This contrast is seen as a sign that we may be just missing the right mathematical insights. And if we find this insight, we might be able to adapt it to unlock other open problems in mathematics (or computer science?).

This is one of these cases where the path (the new proof framework) is expected to be much more interesting than the initial destination (the fact that yes the Euler constant is irrational, of course).