New fundamental result in PDEs

ewmayer · 2013-04-01, 00:42

There are a few notational glitches in the PDF, but the result, if it proves correct, is profound:

Dubslow · 2013-04-01, 01:49

Man I don't even understand the statement or abstract or anything.

Batalov · 2013-04-01, 02:10

Looks like an elaborate prank. [URL="http://thatsmathematics.com/blog/archives/102"]__[/URL]
The references are particularly good.

davieddy · 2013-04-01, 02:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Batalov

Looks like an elaborate prank. [URL="http://thatsmathematics.com/blog/archives/102"]__[/URL]
The references are particularly good.

Well, it's April 1st here, but not yet so in the US.

davar55 · 2013-04-01, 02:39

Check today's date (in about an hour and a half my time).

I think the main result will prove to be a whopper.

(As usual, beaten to the punch.)

2013-04-01, 02:39	#5
davar55 May 2004 New York City 5×7×11² Posts	Check today's date (in about an hour and a half my time). I think the main result will prove to be a whopper. (As usual, beaten to the punch.) Last fiddled with by davar55 on 2013-04-01 at 02:40

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Odd result	swellman	YAFU	15	2016-02-25 00:38
Odd result	1997rj7	PrimeNet	2	2009-12-04 08:48
I generalized the fundamental theorem of calculus	Damian	Math	16	2007-11-05 14:55
Fundamental particle found with no charge.	mfgoode	Science & Technology	5	2006-12-12 17:20
New Result	R.D. Silverman	NFSNET Discussion	1	2005-04-19 23:45

2013-04-01, 01:49	#2
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 3·29·83 Posts	Man I don't even understand the statement or abstract or anything.

2013-04-01, 02:10	#3
Batalov "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 2·47·101 Posts	Looks like an elaborate prank. [URL="http://thatsmathematics.com/blog/archives/102"]__[/URL] The references are particularly good.