How do you get a math proof published as an amateur?

[JMac]

I wrote a proof of the Collatz Conjecture below, and would like to get it published, but am unsure where to take it.

The math is sound, but where would it be most likely to be accepted from a private amateur?

https://easyupload.io/8yx8a4

 

[Steven G]

I could be wrong, but I do not think that the journals look at who the author is but rather they look at the paper. If they recently printed many papers in a particular area then they probably will not print another one in that same area. It also has to do with the area that the editors likes.

Of course, if you are extremely famous then you can get almost anything published. I do not think that any journal would decide not to print a paper by Andrew Wiles.

Submit your paper to the appropriate journals and see what happens.

 

[JMac]

I could be wrong, but I do not think that the journals look at who the author is but rather they look at the paper. If they recently printed many papers in a particular area then they probably will not print another one in that same area. It also has to do with the area that the editors likes.

Of course, if you are extremely famous then you can get almost anything published. I do not think that any journal would decide not to print a paper by Andrew Wiles.

Submit your paper to the appropriate journals and see what happens.

Thank you. I tend to think it will be problematic though the moment I say Collatz in the title. They will assume there i sno way, and moreover that it was done by simply eliminating the division step, and then making the jump to representing the odd numbers as sums of exponents of two added to one, will result in them dropping it.

Does anybody here have trouble following the math, or seeing where it should be described more clearly? It is a very simple proof, but I am not sure I will be able to get people to look at it, it seems so outlandish that problem could be so simple.

 

[Steven G]

I answered you question as honestly as I could.

Do I believe that you have a proof of the conjecture? I'll let you decide.

Rethinking what I wrote as it was for a general paper. Have someone from a good research university look at the paper and say the proof is valid. Give a talk at a major conference on your paper (you will get to give the talk w/o any trouble at all--will top people attend? No!). Give the mathematical community a buzz that you have a valid proof. Go this way.

 

[JMac]

Thank you.

 

[lookagain]

The math is sound, ...

No, that is unsubstantiated at this point. We cannot take your word on that.
And what will encompass "sound math" in your case of your alleged proof? Some
may include combinations of the following: removing typos, having enough rigor,
catching all cases, existence, uniqueness, necessary conditions, sufficient
conditions, set logic, contradiction and related arguments, other aspects.

 

[LCKurtz]

Look at arXiv.org.