User blog comment:PsiCubed2/Does anybody here know where I can have serious googology questions answered?/@comment-35470197-20181114222222/@comment-35470197-20181115095252

> Well then, after I'll learn japanese, I'll certainly follow your recommendations. > This is going to be really quick, right? ;-)

Although learning Japanese is nych easier than learning large cardinals, it is more difficult than proving the termination of a specific version of PSS for googologists who know OCFs as well as you, I guess. It was not so difficult, but was just tiresome.

Therefore concerning PSS, it might be more quick to prove the termination by yourself :D

Concerning feedbacks to your works, you do not have to learn Japanese. Many of us know English enough to understand mathematical arguments, which consists of elementary English compared with daily conversation.

> BTW, we've already seen claims of "proofs" in japanese that BM1 terminates... and in the end it turned out that it is hopelessly broken even before we get to (0,0)(1,1)(2,2).

Gee. Is that a Japanese? Then sorry about it. Since I am a newbie in googology community, I did not know who failed it. Anyway, since there seems to be one or two mathematicians active in Japanese googology community other than me, such a mistake could occur.

> Why don't you guys translate your work into english, so others can verify your work? Mistakes happen, which is why it is standard academic procedure to allow the general mathematical community to inspect new proofs before they are accepted as valid.

I did not know other Japanese by the reason above (newbie). I started to study googology under my googological supervisor just one year ago, and hence I know few about what occurred before that.

For me, I wrote the proof in Japanese because there are more googologists in Japan who are interested in my proof than here. Do you know a person here who would write a proof other than you? I do not know at all. At least, I think that great googologists here who sufficiently understand mathematics do not care about proofs, because they do not usually answer questions on problems and errors in their statements or definitions when I asked them.

If I have written it in English, there would be less reviewers. Then mistakes could not be discovered if exists. It is not same as the case for submitting a manuscript to a journal, which has sufficiently many referees and worldwide readers. I think that English is not so powerful among googology communities as you imagine.

> The incident I've mentioned in my the first paragraph of this comment is an excellent example for why this is so. For quite a long time, everybody here (including myself) just accepted the fact that BM1 terminates without question on grounds that "there is a proof". And we accepted it because we had no way to inspect the actual work (which was written in a language we do not understand).

Interesting. I would have believed the existence of a proof then, but would not have regarded as a fact before I read it. Say, I do not intend to have googologists here regard my proof as a fact without doubts or an axiom.

But, sincerely, I am sorry about that incident caused by the behaviours by Japanese.