Harristotelian Logic

It's not at all difficult for me to prove my result showing the coverage problem of the ring of algebraic integers. Most of the mathematics after all is just basic algebra.

I can give examples to explain it simply enough for most of you to understand as that 2 coprime to 6 in evens tells exactly what a coverage problem looks like.

And the result was published, but then some political stuff got it yanked and the journal died.

If you were reading about all of this as ancient history, you would be amazed that any sensible people could ever fight against the result, and be shocked that denial could last for years.

But this isn't ancient history—it's right now—and for some of you the truth means you did not get a valid doctorate, or that argument you thought was a brilliant proof was not, not brilliant, and not a proof.

If you are a professor, you may have the sinking feeling in your gut of having taught students wrongly for years, even decades.

But what if you just deny, right?

That is the choice that has been made up to this point, so more students can be taught wrongly, and more people can go through years with the wrong mathematical ideas.

Proving the mathematics is the easy part. Getting past basic human denial—people who can't accept not being brilliant, who can't accept being the wrong ones, and now being closer to crackpots than actual mathematicians as they refuse to accept, that is what's so hard.