Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 18, 2019 at 17:16 comment added fedja @kodlu Maybe. Meanwhile you can make the judgement yourself. Ignore all the blah-blah-blah about how one great conjecture implies another one and just read the "proof of the first main result" skipping the detailed considerations of the cases that are obvious to you. In 2-3 hours at most you'll come to a definite conclusion. :-)
Jun 18, 2019 at 8:06 history edited user64494 CC BY-SA 4.0
edited title
Jun 18, 2019 at 8:00 history edited user64494 CC BY-SA 4.0
edited title
Jun 18, 2019 at 5:05 comment added kodlu Thanks @fedja, that's very helpful. Perhaps you can have a look later, when it's not midnight where you are :-)
Jun 18, 2019 at 4:54 comment added fedja The passage "Otherwise H mod r is almost equipped with the uniform probability measure of {0,···,r−1}, which also yields a contradiction." followed by the "end of proof" sign on page 24 doesn't look too promising. As far as I can tell, the author considers various trivial reasons for each of which he (or she?) concludes that the $L^4$-norm tends to $+\infty$. That is all fine, but the interesting case is when the $L^4$ norm does not blow up and that is possible (Rudin-Shapiro polynomials, etc.). So, I'm extremely skeptical but going into all details at midnight is not what I want to try.
Jun 18, 2019 at 1:09 history edited kodlu CC BY-SA 4.0
separated question at the end to a new question
Jun 6, 2019 at 14:27 comment added Timothy Chow The last paragraph ("Is this claim new?") looks like a reasonable question to me, but the general request for "an opinion on its claims" may fall afoul of the sentiments expressed here: meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/927/… See also meta.mathoverflow.net/a/2332/3106
Jun 6, 2019 at 6:25 history edited kodlu CC BY-SA 4.0
fixed repeated phrase
Jun 6, 2019 at 5:24 history asked kodlu CC BY-SA 4.0