So, who is right? Here’s the rub: Mathematics typically prides itself on clarity and consensus, but here, cultural and personal conflicts have created two competing realities.

Most mathematicians worldwide believe Scholze and Stix correctly identified a critical flaw. Yet, in Kyoto, a small but stubborn group insists otherwise, continuing to promote IUT as groundbreaking and flawless.

Joshi sits somewhere in between, asserting he has the true solution to unite the mathematical community. But the hostility and entrenched positions may be too deep to reconcile.

Interestingly, technology might offer the cleanest solution. Formal proof-checking software can theoretically verify each step of a mathematical proof mechanically, eliminating human biases.

But converting Mochizuki’s intricate IUT into a computer-readable format is dauntingly complex, potentially more difficult than the original proof itself.