If you accuse other people of using AI without equivalent proof, then you are applying a standard to them that you refuse to apply to yourself.
Too many things get called religions, but hardcore AI advocacy is so close.
Apologetics, rhetorical devices to convince people of unquantifiable things, miracles as proof, claims about future benefits, an entire eschatology, and endless warnings about how if you don't do it you'll be left behind.
Grok saw the letter from the Field Medalists and wants to assure them that it will never solve a Millennium prize problem
[This is a guest post by Steven Strogatz. This blog post was initially written in a different file format and converted using AI. — T.] WIRED reported today that I began to cry while talking about AI and mathematics. But the article didn’t explain what moved me. The truth is, I’m not entirely sure myself. […]
https://www. eldiario.es/sociedad/grandes-m atematicos-reaccionan-actitud-openai-amenaza-trabajo-intelectual_1_13504677.html # maths # mathematics # math
There is no proof AGI is even possible
Navier-Stokes Announcement https://www.claymath.org/news/navier-stokes-announcement/ (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49668706)
25 Fields medalists signed a declaration this week, and it isn't "AI can't do real math" — Tao grants that outright. Their actual complaint: benchmark-race solving skips the writeup, the attribution, the years of human transmission that turn a proof into something the next mathematician can build
‘Immature playground boasting’: Mathematicians uneasy at OpenAI’s latest scalp www.theguardian.com/science/2026... maybe, until math is proven, verified & cognizable by humans, it should be considered “artificial math,” & viewed as a work in progress until human verification is complete?
[This is a guest post by Silvia De Toffoli and Eamon Duede. This blog post was initially written in a different file format and converted using AI. — T.] Silvia De Toffoli (University School for Advanced Studies IUSS Pavia) Eamon Duede (Princeton University and Purdue University) On September 8th, 2026, OpenAI announced that it had […]
OpenAI spends 15 million to win 1 million prize. This doesn't seem smart to me! thttps://www.theguardian.com/science/2026/sep/12/openai-mathematicians-millennium-prize-problem?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
When AI outperforms humans, who bears the burden of proof?
11/12 BTW: All this for: “The Millennium Prize for solving the Navier–Stokes problem is $1 million.” A telling in this own story…
10/12 In the end, the proof is in the pudding: without human thought, AI would not exist.
It is a tool born of human ingenuity, and at its best, it works hand in hand with us — not as a replacement for mankind, but as an extension of our drive to keep searching for the answers still out there.
4/12 That is exactly the debate this case is likely to reignite over AI’s role in math, proof, authorship, and trust.
OpenAI did not just chase this proof with brains and bravado — it chased it with industrial-scale compute.
Parallel to the other crowdsourced resource drive on this blog, I would like to collect books, writings and other resources that discuss or explain the purpose(s), value(s), and nature of mathematics. As seen in reactions to recent events, one can see many oversimplified or inaccurate perceptions of mathematics, such as The question of what mathematics […]
The Clay Mathematics Institute said on 11 September 2026 that the Navier-Stokes Millennium Prize problem 'has apparently been settled', without naming OpenAI or anyone else, and its own rules mean no prize can be awarded until a solution is published in a qualifying outlet and survives at least...
[This is a guest post by Claire Voisin. This blog post was initially written in a different file format and converted using AI. — T.] Hodge classes can be defined on any compact complex manifold . They are rational Betti cohomology classes on of even degree (eg combinations with -coefficients of classes of oriented codimension […]
The OpenAI math breakthrough controversy explained
The technical dispute focused on Lean proofs. A formal verification might be mathematically sound, but several people argued a machine-checked proof that humans can't actually understand misses the point of mathematics entirely. #software 3/4
"The process is deliberately unhurried, but we will provide updates."
There's interest in using LLM's to produce software that provably is secure under a particular threat model.
Not perfect (no threat model perfectly matches reality) but considered the gold standard. Used to be too labor intensive but that's changing.
oath.tech en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_...
One must remember AI is notorious for hallucinating, just because it has a "proof" doesn't mean its valid. And of course Sam wouldn't do something like this just for the publicity would he?
The OP is Terence Tao. The letter is signed by 25 Fields medallists. This isn't about an LLM doing your taxes. This is about the LLMs solving Millennium Prize problems.
I think I would still be very surprised if AI sovles P vs NP. I figure all the other millennium prize problems are just a matter of time.
Navier-Stokes and Lean. ~ Lance Fortnow. https:// blog.computationalcomplexity.o rg/2026/09/navier-stokes-and-lean.html # LeanProver # AI4Math
AI agents resolved the Navier-Stokes problem, or so we are told. More Millennium Prize problems are reportedly on the way. Are they artists who prize the craft? Or are they house painters who move on to the next job site? https://svivek.com/writing/2026-09-12-painters-and-artists.html
AI agents resolved the Navier-Stokes problem, or so we are told. More Millennium Prize problems are reportedly on the way. Are they artists who prize the craft? Or are they house painters who move on to the next job site? svivek.com/writing/2026...
Is truth futureproof? On the possible futures of mechanized proofs https:// lobste.rs/s/cmgzlj # pdf # math # plt https:// khoury.northeastern.edu/~cmart ens/papers/plateau26-itfp.pdf
The CMI is not rushing to a decision on the prize. They note the prize rules and say “The process is deliberately unhurried, but we will provide updates.”
We’re off to study fluid motion in a fresh cup of really hot tea.
AI firm OpenAI using a non-public system claim to have found a solution to this problem. They say that the equations can ‘develop a singularity in a finite time’ (maths-speak for break down).
openai.com/index/navier...
The Navier-Stokes equations describe the behaviour of fluids, from air over wings to tea being stirred. The ‘Navier-Stokes problem’ is one of seven Millenium Prize problems with a $1 million prize for proving whether these equations break down or not for a fluid like water.
The Clay Mathematics Institute (CMI), based in Oxford and Denver, has announced that “we contemplate the announcement that the Navier-Stokes problem has apparently been settled”, which would be a major advance in the study of fluids.
Mathematicians consider the consequences of AI's capable of solving thorny mathematical problems.
Imagine if medical researchers were railing against AI's snappiness at discovering effective treatments and cures for illness and disease, depriving them of the cognitive pleasure of a lengthy pursuit—leaving patients waiting, suffering and dying. www.theguardian.com/science/2026... #AI
On the existence of non-sofic groups. ~ Andreas Thom. https:// terrytao.wordpress.com/2026/09 /11/on-the-existence-of-non-sofic-groups/ # AI4Math
The Millennium Prize problems have precisely nothing to do with curing cancer. ❤️
On the impact of AI on the mathematical practice. ~ Manuel Rivera. https:// proofsandprompts.com/2026/09/1 2/on-the-impact-of-ai-on-the-mathematical-practice/ # AI4Math
The Association for Human Mathematics (AHM). ~ AHM communications group. https:// proofsandprompts.com/2026/09/1 2/the-association-for-human-mathematics/ # AI4Math