<div dir="ltr"><div>> Does anyone here know more?<br>
> <br>
> Hyderabad math wizard solves Reimann Hypothesis (<a href="http://deccanchronicle.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">deccanchronicle.com</a>)<br>
> <<a href="https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/in-other-news/280621/hyderabad-math-wizard-solves-reimann-hypothesis.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/in-other-news/280621/hyderabad-math-wizard-solves-reimann-hypothesis.html</a>><br>
> <br>
> Udhay</div><div><br></div><div>There is a question on skeptics.stackexchange <br><a href="https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/51965/have-mathematicians-concluded-that-an-indian-mathematical-physicist-has-solved-t">https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/51965/have-mathematicians-concluded-that-an-indian-mathematical-physicist-has-solved-t</a><br></div><div>and one on math.stackexchange<br><a href="https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4185354/is-kumar-eswarans-proposed-proof-of-the-riemann-hypothesis-correct">https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4185354/is-kumar-eswarans-proposed-proof-of-the-riemann-hypothesis-correct</a><br></div><div>about this. <br></div><div><br>From what I can gather from the (at the time of writing) single answer in each question, the proof and how it was evaluated seem questionable at best. I have not gone through it in details myself, though, so will refrain from making any jugement save for stating that people who have spent more time on it seem to be unconvinced by the proof itself as well as the review process.  <br><br></div><div>Florent Michel<br></div></div>