Skip to main content
fixed spelling
Source Link
GH from MO
  • 105.2k
  • 8
  • 292
  • 398

Ke Gong kindly sent me a link to Vinogradov's work online:

http://www.mathnet.ru/php/person.phtml?&personid=26537&option_lang=rus

In summary, isit seems clear that the 1937 proof was ineffective.

Questions (a) and (b) remain to be answered.

Ke Gong kindly sent me a link to Vinogradov's work online:

http://www.mathnet.ru/php/person.phtml?&personid=26537&option_lang=rus

In summary, is seems clear that the 1937 proof was ineffective.

Questions (a) and (b) remain to be answered.

Ke Gong kindly sent me a link to Vinogradov's work online:

http://www.mathnet.ru/php/person.phtml?&personid=26537&option_lang=rus

In summary, it seems clear that the 1937 proof was ineffective.

Questions (a) and (b) remain to be answered.

Source Link
H A Helfgott
  • 20.2k
  • 3
  • 43
  • 126

Ke Gong kindly sent me a link to Vinogradov's work online:

http://www.mathnet.ru/php/person.phtml?&personid=26537&option_lang=rus

In summary, is seems clear that the 1937 proof was ineffective.

Questions (a) and (b) remain to be answered.