Skip to main content
MathOverflow

Return to Answer

added 2 characters in body
Source Link
Joël
Joël
  • 26k
  • 16
  • 22

Okay, let me try to articulate what I think is wrong with this question: it is very unlikely to get a satisfactory answer.

Indeed, suppose the rumor is false (which is think is more probable, but that's not important). There is still no way to disprove it, or even to argue convincingly against it. It is not falsifiable in Popper's sense. But if the rumor is true, and there are around some paperpapers by Grothendieck under another name, then it means that Grothendieck, and anyone else in the know, at least up to this time, wantwants to keep them secret. It is extremely unlikely that seeing the question on MO, Grothendieck (or anyone in the know) would suddenly decide to come out and say: "Hey guys, you know, this and that paper there, they're mine". If such a decision is ever made, ii will come out of Grothendieck's own evolution and decision, or as a consequence of important event in his life (for example his death - he may have left a will asking his pseudonym to be made public after his death.

So, in any case, a satisfactory answer to this question is very unlikely. On MO, we tend to have a strong preference for questions that have a good answer, and that's why, I think, many people voted to close it and while I am inclined to do so too.

Okay, let me try to articulate what I think is wrong with this question: it is very unlikely to get a satisfactory answer.

Indeed, suppose the rumor is false (which is think is more probable, but that's not important). There is still no way to disprove it, or even to argue convincingly against it. It is not falsifiable in Popper's sense. But if the rumor is true, and there are around some paper by Grothendieck under another name, then it means that Grothendieck, and anyone else in the know, at least up to this time, want to keep them secret. It is extremely unlikely that seeing the question on MO, Grothendieck (or anyone in the know) would suddenly decide to come out and say: "Hey guys, you know, this and that paper there, they're mine". If such a decision is ever made, ii will come out of Grothendieck's own evolution and decision, or as a consequence of important event in his life (for example his death - he may have left a will asking his pseudonym to be made public after his death.

So, in any case, a satisfactory answer to this question is very unlikely. On MO, we tend to have a strong preference for questions that have a good answer, and that's why, I think, many people voted to close it and while I am inclined to do so too.

Okay, let me try to articulate what I think is wrong with this question: it is very unlikely to get a satisfactory answer.

Indeed, suppose the rumor is false (which is think is more probable, but that's not important). There is still no way to disprove it, or even to argue convincingly against it. It is not falsifiable in Popper's sense. But if the rumor is true, and there are around some papers by Grothendieck under another name, then it means that Grothendieck, and anyone else in the know, at least up to this time, wants to keep them secret. It is extremely unlikely that seeing the question on MO, Grothendieck (or anyone in the know) would suddenly decide to come out and say: "Hey guys, you know, this and that paper there, they're mine". If such a decision is ever made, ii will come out of Grothendieck's own evolution and decision, or as a consequence of important event in his life (for example his death - he may have left a will asking his pseudonym to be made public after his death.

So, in any case, a satisfactory answer to this question is very unlikely. On MO, we tend to have a strong preference for questions that have a good answer, and that's why, I think, many people voted to close it and while I am inclined to do so too.

Source Link
Joël
Joël
  • 26k
  • 16
  • 22

Okay, let me try to articulate what I think is wrong with this question: it is very unlikely to get a satisfactory answer.

Indeed, suppose the rumor is false (which is think is more probable, but that's not important). There is still no way to disprove it, or even to argue convincingly against it. It is not falsifiable in Popper's sense. But if the rumor is true, and there are around some paper by Grothendieck under another name, then it means that Grothendieck, and anyone else in the know, at least up to this time, want to keep them secret. It is extremely unlikely that seeing the question on MO, Grothendieck (or anyone in the know) would suddenly decide to come out and say: "Hey guys, you know, this and that paper there, they're mine". If such a decision is ever made, ii will come out of Grothendieck's own evolution and decision, or as a consequence of important event in his life (for example his death - he may have left a will asking his pseudonym to be made public after his death.

So, in any case, a satisfactory answer to this question is very unlikely. On MO, we tend to have a strong preference for questions that have a good answer, and that's why, I think, many people voted to close it and while I am inclined to do so too.