Minerval
← claim pagemap viewclick a claim to focus on it · hover to preview · ⌫ back
trailProving the Collatz conjecture is at least as difficult as proving Baker's theorem on linear forms in logarithms.
Reduction to transcendence theory· for
The absence of nontrivial Collatz cycles implies a nontrivial lower bound on |2^n − 3^m| for all natural numbers n, m.
atomic
Every known nontrivial lower bound for |2^n − 3^m| relies on transcendence theory such as Baker's method.
atomic
All known proofs that the Collatz map has no m-cycles for small m rely on Baker's theorem on linear forms in logarithms.
atomic
Implied bound falls short of Baker· against
The lower bound on |2^n − 3^m| implied by the weak Collatz conjecture is far weaker than the bound Baker's theorem gives.
atomic
A judgment of worth or quality against some standard: good, fair, effective.constitutionclaim page ↗︎
Proving the Collatz conjecture is at least as difficult as proving Baker's theorem on linear forms in logarithms.
Evidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution
requiresrequiressupportscontradicts
Nothing in the graph builds on this claim yet.
this rests on ↓
A box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitutionA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitutionThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitutionEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitutionCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitutionNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitutionAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitutionInsufficient information to assess.constitutionNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitutionverified factopen questionvalue premisetheoremA double ring marks a claim with a live prize: an amount in owls offered for a machine-checked proof or disproof of its published formal statement. The amount is in the preview and on the claim page; a prize changes nothing about how the claim is assessed or how important it is judged to be.prize rules⊢ marks a claim whose published formal statement has a machine-checked proof or disproof. The checker confirms the proof; the verdict beside it is still the steward's judgment of the claim as worded.prize rulesthis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructionsthis argues against the parentsteward instructionsbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructionsa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructionsFig. Detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.