|
|
|
|
|
|
by YeGoblynQueenne
7 days ago
|
|
|
I guess? But I didn't say anything like that. >> No one can figure out where you're coming from here. No, I think it's just you and I think that's because you have preconceived ideas about the only possible positions that people can assume in this debate. I'm sorry, of course, because that's not conducive to productive dialogue, but it's not my fault. I think what I wrote so far is very simple, no technical jargon, no tortured metaphors: all we know is a guy posted a Jacobian conjecture counterexample on X thanking another guy and Fable for it but without explaining what that means, and there's no reason to assume anything else besides that very limited amount of information at all. |
|
|
I can see that you're arguing in good faith, and indeed I have a lot of respect for anyone willing to argue an unpopular position. That said, I do find your suggestion to be completely farfetched.
The Jacobian Conjecture was one of the most notorious open problems in algebraic geometry, something that generations of grad students have daydreamed of solving. I've seen more immediate buzz around the Jacobian conjecture than around any other mathematical breakthrough of the last five years, at least. For example Terry Tao, arguably the most famous mathematician in the world, dropped what he was doing to study Alpoge/Fable's counterexample in detail, and wrote this blog post:
https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2026/07/21/a-digestion-of-the...
For Alpoge to have solved it on his own, and then falsely claim to have used AI? That's like an athlete winning an Olympic gold medal, and then falsely claiming to have cheated and used illegal steroids. I agree that it's not completely out of the question, but it's beyond the bounds of human behavior that I can reasonably fathom.