Global Mathematicians at Every Institution and Department Got Busy

With the editorial board's approval, the Journal of Mathematics published a special issue in Chinese and English, The Strong BSD Conjecture Proof, at lightning speed.

Around the world, many mathematical teams took on the task of explaining The Strong BSD Conjecture Proof.

There was a slight difference between explaining and verifying.

The explanation teams first assumed that The Strong BSD Conjecture Proof was correct. With that academic premise, they used various mathematical techniques and computer methods to prove it correct and offer a reasonable explanation. Their reports were extremely detailed, enough to form a new paper.

Verification teams mainly gave a conclusion: correct or incorrect.

What grounds did they have for their conclusions? Their approach was much like that of a paper reviewer: they provided only a page or two, or even just a few sentences, explaining their decision.

The members of the verification teams who believed it correct had an academic motivation similar to that of the explanation teams. They first accepted that The Strong BSD Conjecture Proof was correct, then set out to verify it. The difference was that they ultimately offered a "verification conclusion," whereas the explanation teams produced an "explanation report." Conclusions were concise; reports were usually detailed.

The members who sought to disprove it did the opposite: they first assumed that The Strong BSD Conjecture Proof was incorrect, then tried to refute it.

Whether they belonged to explanation teams or verification teams, nearly all of them did this work for free. They received no payment.

Payment was a small matter. What interested the explanation and verification teams most was proving The Strong BSD Conjecture Proof correct—or disproving it.

Oxford University, England.

Dr. Adama and his academic partner, John Green, were studying the English edition of the Journal of Mathematics.

There was only one paper in