Skip to main content
4 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 24, 2019 at 13:42 comment added Alex Gavrilov My (not very educated) opinion is that the conjecture is more likely to be true then false. And, my wild guess is that $l^{100}$ or at least $l^{1000}$ should be enough to see the number unless the variety is not very nice. Of course, a much more interesting possibility is disproving the conjecture (and collecting $1M). But yes, one cannot do it this way having no rigorous bound on the height, and obtaining the latter may be rather difficult.
Apr 23, 2019 at 18:56 comment added Will Sawin What does ``sufficient precision" mean? Say we can compute them mod $\ell^n$. We have evidence for the conjecture if the residue class contains a rational number of height much less than $\ell^{n/2}$, but since every residue class contains a rational number of height at most $\ell^{n/2}$, we can never disprove the conjecutre Unless, I guess, we have a bound on what the numerator and denominator of the rational number should be?
Apr 23, 2019 at 13:05 history edited R.P. CC BY-SA 4.0
pedantic typo correction
Apr 23, 2019 at 12:14 history asked Alex Gavrilov CC BY-SA 4.0