his first proof has 7 versions and turns out false. this was over 2 years of work from the timestamps. this is some random guy in zimbabwe. and you think were mean to think this paper is prob wrong? ljl...

it's obv wrong and the mistake is probably related to a statement that is assumed to be true but actually isnt. so in fact, not only is the proof wrong but the author doesnt even understand the tools hes using. ljl.

Or maybe it's you who actually doesn't understand the methods the author is using ? If it's cranky as you claim, it sjould be very easy for you to simply POINT out the EXACT error. It's a 4-page paper, for goodness sake.

It doesn't matter how many wrong versions the author produced before. A problem like the RH can only be understood after numerous failed attempts. The question is, does the author LEARN from the past mistakes to make their approach better ? And why would the author's nationality matter ?

Your comments are completely void of any sense nor substance. You said you're not a number theorist, so you should probably just be a spectator in this thread.