During this time, Lu Zhou has been busy with the research of superconducting materials and the graduation of students.

Although he had been labelled with attention to Sir Attia's paper and the progress of the Riemann conjecture, he did not have time to pay attention to the presentation of the Heidelberg Laureates' Forum, and the sudden Nobel Prize phone call made him completely forget about it.

Until recently, he received an invitation to write in the Annals of Mathematics.

The editor-in-chief, Professor Peter Sanak, wanted him to write a short review of Sir Attiyah's paper of no more than 500 words, and Lu Zhou remembered this news that had caused a sensation in the mathematical community not long ago.

Early in the morning, when I came to the office, Hardy walked over with a few sheets of A4 paper.

"Professor, I've already printed the paper you wanted."

Taking Sir Attia's paper from Hardy's hand, Lu Zhou was slightly stunned and glanced at Hardy suspiciously.

"That's all?"

"Yes, Professor," Hardy nodded, "I'm sure that's all there is. ”

The paper is five pages long and has only three citations. There are a few typographical errors in sections 3 and 4, but they are not a big problem.

If the standard requirements of a doctoral dissertation are met, this dissertation will definitely not be able to pass, but for the big bulls in the academic world, everyone is more tolerant.

For example, when Wiles proved Fermat's theorem, he even added a "preface" to the front of the abstract, using a short paragraph to tell about Fermat's theorem and his own childhood.

Sir Attiyah, of course, was also self-willed, after all, he was a winner of the Fields Medal and the Abel Prize, and his research on the Attia Singer indicator theorem was one of the most important mathematical achievements of the twentieth century.

However, none of this is the point.

The mathematical community will not blindly believe a person because of what glory or achievements a person has achieved?

Because the invitation was sent by Professor Sanak, and out of respect for a respected scholar, even if he didn't have much hope, Lu Zhou still sat down in his office chair and read the five-page paper without any subjectivity.

However, the more he looked down, the more his brow furrowed.

As Sir Attiyah had previously declared, he "solved" the problem in a very simple way.

Sure enough, this kind of claim is often unreliable......

After reading the paper from beginning to end, Lu Zhou has a preliminary understanding of the proof idea of the whole paper.

To put it simply, Sir Attiyah introduced a weakly analytic todd function of his own invention into the proof, and assumed that this todd function was associated with the fine structural constants in physics.

The most interesting thing is not that he did not specifically describe what this todd function is and what its relationship is to the Riemann zeta function in his paper, but that he used the method of counterproof in the process of argumentation.

Yes, he even used the method of counter-evidence.

That is, if the Riemann conjecture is wrong, then "my theory" is contradictory.

Because my theory can't be contradictory, the Riemann conjecture must be correct......

Seeing this, in fact, you can already draw conclusions.

It's a pity, but now it seems that my initial hunch was right.

Seeing that the expression on Lu Zhou's face didn't seem quite right, Hardy asked beside him, "How do you feel about this paper?" ”

After hearing this, Lu Zhou suddenly smiled and put the paper aside.

"You are also in the direction of number theory, don't you have a little bit of your own opinion?"

Hardy scratched the back of his head embarrassedly, "My field of study is not the Riemann zeta function...... To be honest, Sir Attia's paper is so esoteric that it seems to use some physical terms. ”

Lu Zhou: "That's right, Sir Attiyah used some terms in physics. I once heard Professor Witten, whom I knew well, say that Sir Attiyah seems to have only entered the field of physics in recent years, and that his physical instincts are too flattering. As for this paper, in layman's terms, he constructs a weakly analytic todd function and combines this function with a physical concept. ”

"Is there anything wrong with that weakly parsed todd function?" Hardy couldn't help but ask.

Lu Zhou: "Whether there is a problem with the weakly parse todd function itself is still up for debate...... Because there is so little information that can be retrieved about this function, I have no way to tell. The biggest problem with his paper is the introduction of the fine structure constant in physics. ”

Hardy: "...... Fine structure constants? ”

"Well," Lu Zhou nodded, and continued, "This is an important dimensionless number in physics, with α symbols, commonly found in quantum electrodynamics. ”

This is an important concept in physics, and it is often used to measure the strength of the interaction of charged particles with electromagnetic fields.

Interestingly, physicists have spent more than a century trying to derive α value from a physical point of view, and then "concoct" a mathematical formula for it.

But unfortunately, no one has succeeded so far that most people have given up.

However, in this treatise, Sir Attiyah is very rash to use this concept directly, and use it as the basis for his own argument.

Although I am very reluctant to say this, most of the people who often do this kind of thing are civil science such as Professor Enoch......

Hardy said regretfully, "...... If you are right, then Sir Attiyah will not be in danger. ”

"Not really," Lu Zhou shook his head, "even if he is wrong, his courage is still commendable." ”

In academia, there is a fundamental difference between "honest error" and "academic fraud".

In his later years, Einstein also claimed many times that he had found a way to unify the field theory, and even calculated it until the moment before his death...... Even then, everyone no longer believed in his calculations, but quietly accompanied him to the end.

In any case, it is not easy to be able to engage in research at the age of 90.

It is even more commendable to be able to gamble on the honor of one's own body and show the courage to challenge Mount Everest.

In short, it's still what he said before, it's good that the old man is happy......

……

Lu Zhou pondered for a while, and finally wrote a reply politely, politely declining Professor Peter Sanak's invitation on the grounds that he was very busy with research.

Unlike Shinichi Mochizuki's obscure and lengthy and complicated paper, when everyone is unclear whether he is right or wrong, anyone who understands is obliged to stand up and testify.

The problems in Sir Attia's paper, however, are so obvious that it does not even take a particularly high level of mathematical knowledge to see the problems.

Even if he didn't say anything, everyone actually knew it in their hearts.

But this kind of blackface thing should be left to Mr. Faltings.

Anyway, Mr. Faltins's "meanness" that doesn't give face to everyone is also well-known in the mathematical world, and everyone won't feel how strange it is when they hear it, let alone lose face.

But let a 25-year-old do this kind of thing......

It's a little too inconsiderate of the feelings of the elderly.

After writing this reply, Lu Zhou suddenly understood why it was such a major matter, but there was no tacit understanding that no one in the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study discussed it.

After all, anyone has the day to grow old, and everyone needs decency and dignity as well......

Especially for a scholar worthy of respect.

In addition, although the media likes to exaggerate the facts with something that attracts attention, they are also more willing to believe that Sir Attia, who is nearly 90 years old, is still young......

But unfortunately, mathematics only seeks the truth, and does not and has never compromised with public opinion.