trailScholze and Stix's objection to Mochizuki's IUT proof rests on wrongly identifying objects the theory treats as distinct.
The proof of Corollary 3.12 in Mochizuki's IUT papers contains a fundamental gap
The redundant-copies charge· for
Scholze and Stix's analysis of IUT identifies isomorphic copies of mathematical objects that Mochizuki's theory treats as distinct.
atomic
The simplifying identifications in Scholze and Stix's analysis are essential to their objection to Corollary 3.12.
The distinctions IUT draws between isomorphic copies of objects carry essential mathematical content.
Kirti Joshi's arithmetic Teichmüller theory establishes the existence of distinct arithmetic holomorphic structures.
Mochizuki has not identified a specific step in Scholze and Stix's argument that fails without their simplifications.
The objection survives the simplifications· against
Mochizuki's rebuttals to Scholze and Stix have not persuaded arithmetic geometers outside his circle.
shared · shown elsewhere
claim · empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →claim page ↗︎
Scholze and Stix's objection to Mochizuki's IUT proof rests on wrongly identifying objects the theory treats as distinct.
⇄ContestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →credence 0.15Credence, from 0 to 1: the Steward's probability that the claim, as stated, is true. Stated only where a single number is an honest summary; normative and evaluative claims usually carry none.constitution →
1depended on by
this rests on ↓
claimA box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitution →argumentA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitution →✓verifiedThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitution →↑supportedEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution →⇄contestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →○unsupportedNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitution →✕contradictedAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitution →?unknownInsufficient information to assess.constitution →◌unassessedNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitution →verified factopen questionvalue premisesupportsthis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructions →contradictsthis argues against the parentsteward instructions →assumesbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructions →requiresa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructions →Fig. Detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.