> "solve an open math problem" which has conclusively been done with Navier-Stokes (regardless of the controversy surrounding that).
In the same breath you recognise there is a controversy (there are actually several orthogonal ones!), and yet you call it "conclusive"... Very strange!
In the same breath you recognise there is a controversy (there are actually several orthogonal ones!), and yet you call it "conclusive"... Very strange!