This set of slides (I owe the link to @monsoon0 & @pwr2dppl) contains many interesting examples; I agree with Voevodsky and Buzzard about the issue of people trusting arguments based on the author's status. Less-exalted ppl can't get jobs+promotions based on such incomplete work!
-
-
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
The Kollár paper is correct — I’m kind of mystified by the suggestion that this is hard to figure out! Hint: one was published after the other, in the same journal. That said, the Kollár article is also (comparatively) easy to read and understand; one needn’t rely on “elders.”
-
I'm not a number theorist/algebraic geometer. I have nothing to go on but the fact the Annals referees and editors accepted both papers, and one claims the other is mistaken.
- Još 4 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Kollar > Schumacher + Tsuji ?

-
Someone else said this too, whose attempts to publish were possibly affected by the shade this cast on one of the latter authors.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
I'm surprised there hasn't been a Princeton seminar on discovering a mistake in one of those papers.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.