Correction to "$C_1$ in [2] is zero"
Differential Geometry
2015-12-14 v1
Abstract
John Morgan and G,Tian pointed out a mistake in the concluding argument for our paper entitled " in [2] is zero", which was recently published in arXiv:1512.02098. We hereby acknowledge this mistake and correct the computation, leading to the conclusion that is non-zero and that their reference [2] does indeed fully address and resolve the issue raised by the counter-example which we provided in [3] to the inequality (19.10) in their monograph [1].
Keywords
Cite
@article{arxiv.1512.03777,
title = {Correction to "$C_1$ in [2] is zero"},
author = {Abbas Bahri},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.03777},
year = {2015}
}