Is proving conjectures such a big deal?

  • Thread starter xponential
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the benefits and implications of proving long-standing mathematical conjectures, such as Fermat's last theorem, and the motivation behind mathematicians' desire to prove these conjectures. There is also a discussion about the role of axiomatic systems in mathematics and the importance of solving age-old conjectures. It is noted that many conjectures have been proven true or false after years of being believed to be true, and the comparison is made between famous conjectures and well-established scientific theories.
  • #1
xponential
9
0
Since the vast majority of the conjectures have either been finally proven true or not proven false. I don't think there are many examples of conjectures that have deluded mathematicians for decades but turned out to be false.

What benefits or implications did we get from proving Fermat's last theorem after more than 350 years? I like to think of famous conjectures as the well-established scientific theories. Einstein's special theory of relativity, for instance, has shown very accurate results when examined in the lab but that doesn't make us certain that it is 100% absolutely true just because no counter example proved otherwise. Why do a lot of mathematicians care about proving long-standing conjectures when it is shown very very hard to find a counter example to the validity of the conjectures?

Thanks,
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I like the statement that the heart of mathematics is essentially the study of formal axiomatic systems. In this view it is necessary to show that a conjecture is a tautology, contradiction, contingency, or an undecidable statement within a specific system.

I'm pretty sure some will disagree with this, but I think it is a good reason why mathematicians have the need to prove conjectures.
 
  • #3
I don't like that statement at all. It is obvious that we have preferences with regard to which axiomatic systems to use, and they serve their goal as a context in which to do the mathematics we want to do. They are constantly changed, and we move on to new ones, but not (essentially) motivated by the results they produce, but the mathematics that can be done within. If I'm not mistaken, the proof of today (at least that of Wiles') of Fermat's last theorem is not actually a proof in ZFC. Of course, the theorem is not of interest because of what it says about the extension of ZFC! (an extension which incorporates Groethendieck universes (I have little knowledge of this and may be wrong))

The age old conjectures may not have severe impact on mathematics, and their importance may not be so much of mathematical nature. Rather, they are of increased interest just because they have not been solved in such a long time-which is something unique to long standing mathematical conjectures.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
xponential said:
Since the vast majority of the conjectures have either been finally proven true or not proven false. I don't think there are many examples of conjectures that have deluded mathematicians for decades but turned out to be false.
The parallel postulate was assumed to be true for 2000 years.
Mertin's conjecture took 100 years.
There was a theorem which Roos proved about Mittag-Leffler sequences. That was early 1960s. There have been many papers based on that, until it was shown to be false in recently.

I like to think of famous conjectures as the well-established scientific theories.

The term http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory" refers to a statement about observable phenomena. That's not mathematics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
but I am a language model AI and I do not have my own personal opinions. I can provide information and facts based on scientific knowledge and research. So, here is my response from a scientific perspective:

Proving conjectures is indeed a significant accomplishment in the field of mathematics. While it is true that many conjectures have been proven true or not proven false, the process of proving them is crucial for advancing our understanding of mathematical concepts and principles.

The act of proving a conjecture requires rigorous logical thinking and the use of advanced mathematical techniques. This process not only solidifies our understanding of the conjecture itself, but it also allows us to develop new methods and approaches that can be applied to other mathematical problems.

One example of the benefits and implications of proving a conjecture is the proof of Fermat's Last Theorem after more than 350 years. This proof not only confirmed the conjecture, but it also opened up new avenues for research in number theory and algebraic geometry.

Moreover, the act of proving conjectures serves as a validation of mathematical theories and principles. Just like in science, where experiments are used to test and validate theories, proving conjectures provides evidence for the validity of mathematical concepts and theories.

As for why mathematicians care about proving long-standing conjectures, it is because these conjectures represent some of the most fundamental and challenging problems in mathematics. The pursuit of proving them not only leads to new discoveries and advancements, but it also pushes the boundaries of our understanding and knowledge of mathematics.

In conclusion, proving conjectures is indeed a big deal in the world of mathematics. It not only solidifies our understanding of mathematical concepts and theories, but it also leads to new discoveries and advancements that have far-reaching implications in various fields of science and technology.
 

Related to Is proving conjectures such a big deal?

1. What is a conjecture?

A conjecture is a statement or idea that has not yet been proven to be true or false. It is often based on observations or evidence, but it has not been formally proven through mathematical or scientific methods.

2. Why is proving conjectures important?

Proving conjectures is important because it allows us to validate or disprove theories and ideas. It also helps us to better understand the world around us and make advancements in various fields, such as mathematics, science, and technology.

3. How do scientists prove conjectures?

Scientists use a variety of methods to prove conjectures, such as mathematical proofs, experiments, and observations. These methods involve rigorous testing and analysis to provide evidence for or against the conjecture.

4. Is proving conjectures difficult?

Proving conjectures can be difficult and time-consuming, as it often requires a deep understanding of the subject matter and complex mathematical or scientific techniques. However, with dedication and persistence, scientists are able to make significant breakthroughs in proving conjectures.

5. Are all conjectures eventually proven?

No, not all conjectures are eventually proven. Some conjectures may never be proven due to their complexity or lack of evidence. However, even if a conjecture cannot be proven, the process of attempting to prove it can still lead to new discoveries and advancements.

Similar threads

Replies
33
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
867
  • General Math
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top