>>890-891
どうも、スレ主です
ありがとうございます

なるほど、それ面白いかも
ところで、>>11 Peter Scholze and Jakob Stix, Why abc is still a conjecture. https://ncatlab.org/nlab/files/why_abc_is_still_a_conjecture.pdf Date: August 23, 2018
で、P9
As we are interested in comparing real numbers, and we have seen that various copies of ordered 1-dimensional R-vector spaces arise, it is critical to spell out all identifications of copies of real numbers that are in place.
In particular, in order to say that the abstract Θ-pilot
object encodes the arithmetic degree of the (j-th) concrete Θ-pilot object, we saw that it was
necessary to change the isomorphism R ?= R○・,Θ by the scalar j2 , j = 1, . . . , `> (or their average,
if one is interested in the averaged degree). Trying to unravel exactly what is going on, we
were drawing the following diagram in Kyoto. There are several ordered 1-dimensional R-vector
spaces appearing:
略
In order for a meaningful inequality to be concluded, one must consistently identify all of these.
略
However, it is clear that
this will result in the whole diagram having monodromy j2, i.e., being inconsistent.
The conclusion of this discussion is that with consistent identifications of copies of real numbers, one must in (1.5) omit the scalars j2
that appear, which leads to an empty inequality.

と結論づけているけど、
ショルツェ氏は、ここの議論が肝で、”which leads to an empty inequality”といい
望月氏は、IUTを誤読していると主張する

で、個人的には、本来望月氏側が、ショルツェ氏のこの筋にそって、具体的に「ここが、こう違う」と（逐一、かつ事細かく）指摘すれば良いと思うのだが
それをせずに、抽象的に「単純化しずぎ」と主張して、「∧∨取り違いだ論文」書いたからこれを読め（つまりは変化球勝負） だった
今年は、真正面から、”Peter Scholze and Jakob Stix, Why abc is still a conjecture”を取り上げて、論破してほしい（直球勝負）と思う今日この頃です