/sci/ - Science & Math

You can read about all of the evidence to suggest it's true. This isn't water tight proof that it is true, as a very large counter-example could exist. I'm not suggesting we flat out "accept" conjectures without watertight proofs as "true". I meant, basically is it acceptable to have a column of "probably true w/ x arbitrary %" and "probably not true" list of conjectures that we can enumerate in some list and use the evidence we obtain to increase the % of the the likelihood.

Then from there use those "likely but not proven" conjectures to prove other theorems.

>>8444084
He's you, but stronger.

>>7206844