Timeline for What are some famous rejections of correct mathematics?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2022 at 16:13 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
http -> https (the question was bumped anyway)
|
| Oct 24, 2019 at 21:20 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | @DeaneYang: The accounts I have been able to find, such as this one and this one, indicate that de Branges circulated a 350-page manuscript privately among a number of mathematicians, but they do not mention any formal submission to a journal or other publisher. As for whether this means the proof was never "rejected," the OP uses the phrase "rejected by the community." I think this is an accurate description in this case, even if there was no official rejection by a journal. | |
| Jan 30, 2017 at 4:28 | comment | added | Deane Yang | Correct me if I'm wrong. My recollection is that de Branges wrote a monograph or long paper on a theory of Hilbert or Banach spaces developed by him and asserted that the Bieberbach conjecture was a consequence. However, no one wanted to read the full monograph, so no one knew whether his proof was correct or not. I can't find any evidence of this monograph, but, if it really existed, I'm sure he tried to get it published and it was rejected. It was only after the Leningrad seminar was able to extract the proof from the monograph and streamline it that the proof was accepted as correct. | |
| Jan 29, 2017 at 20:07 | comment | added | Alexandre Eremenko | de Branges proof of the Bieberbach conjecture was never rejected. His paper of Riemann hypothesis was never submitted to a journal, thus it also could not be rejected. | |
| Aug 6, 2010 at 18:23 | comment | added | Micah Milinovich | @ Lasse: To make matters worse for de Branges, Li is one of his former graduate students. | |
| Jun 7, 2010 at 4:43 | comment | added | Victor Protsak | He wished it upon himself: the first two rejected versions were wrong! | |
| Feb 6, 2010 at 2:28 | comment | added | Will Orrick | I believe Lagarias has studied it. See math.lsa.umich.edu/~lagarias/doc/debranges-houches.pdf | |
| Feb 3, 2010 at 11:28 | comment | added | Lasse Rempe | The Bieberbach conjecture is a good example. Regarding the Riemann Hypothesis, I recall that I have seen at least one paper that claimed to show that de Brange's approach (at the time) could not prove it. Doing a quick search, it was probably the Conrey and Li paper from 1998 mentioned on the Wikipedia page. Whether his approach has changed since then I do not know. | |
| Feb 3, 2010 at 1:45 | comment | added | Steve Huntsman | I guess de Branges would probably say "My proof of the Riemann hypothesis". Has anyone been known to take a serious look at it? | |
| Feb 3, 2010 at 1:43 | history | answered | Deane Yang | CC BY-SA 2.5 |