[aleph_minus_one]

> When the likes of Peter Scholze (fields medal!) and other very high profile mathematicians find (serious) flaws in every posted manuscript about this... I mean, it's pretty clear to me what's going on. The proof just doesn't go through.

On the other hand, Ivan Fesenko (also a heavyweight; he is for example the PhD advisor of the Fields medalist Caucher Birkar) insists that Mochizuki's proof is correct.

* Here is a popular scientific article from 2016 where Ivan Fesenko presents his perspective on this topic: https://inference-review.com/article/fukugen

* A popular scientific article by David Michael Roberts (also a renowned mathematician) from 2019 about where he believes an important contentious point in the different viewpoints of Scholze/Stix vs Mochizuki lies: https://inference-review.com/article/a-crisis-of-identificat...

[bubblyworld]

Fantastic links, thank you. When I say Scholze and friends disagree I mean they seem to have specific mathematical criticisms with mochizuki's school that have not been addressed publically, not just "structural opinions" (for lack of a better word). For instance, see Sawin's answer here: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/467696/global-character-o...

But that's fair, it's not exactly one-sided, but to my (completely inexpert) judgement the matter seems heavily weighted against mochizuki?