[Divver]

While I agree with the overall sentiment here, on an unrelated note I noticed someone commented “If I saw Terence Tao’s name on it I’d assume it’s true” (I’m paraphrasing what they said)

That kind of assumption has actually bitten Mathematics in Academia in the past:

“ In the final sentence of the same paper, Gödel added:

In conclusion, I would still like to remark that Theorem I can also be proved, by the same method, for formulas that contain the identity sign.

Mathematicians took Gödel's word for it, and proved results derived from this one, until the mid-1960s, when Stål Aanderaa realized that Gödel had been mistaken, and the argument Gödel used would not work. In 1983, Warren Goldfarb showed that not only was Gödel's argument invalid, but his claimed result was actually false, and the larger class was not decidable. “

So although statistically assuming the proof is correct for a super famous “genius” mathematician isn’t a “bad” assumption since you’re “probably” correct in that assumption.

That’s not the same as certainty.

And before using that proof in further works

It’s very important for some others to go through and validate the proof as well.

Even the smartest humans are plagued by the simple fact that they are human and thus prone to mistake/error from time to time.

Source of the anecdote: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/139503/in-the-histo...