I have a question that might be stupid, but it bugs me for some time. It's quite simple:
Let's say we have a conjecture, such that if the conjecture is true then another theorem will be true. Does proving the latter theorem without relying on the initial conjecture at all imply that the conjecture is also true?
As an example, it is quite known that if Riemann Hypothesis is true then many theorems will hold true. (I read that somewhere, but I don't have a source right now.) Does proving one of those theorems without using in the proof any connection with the conjecture make the conjecture to be also true?
Put in other words, let's say if R-H is true then a equals b. Would proving a equals b (without touching R-H) transition the proof to R-H?
I would suspect that others thought of this thing too, so a link to that would suffice.
No, it doesn't.
Say $A$ implies $B$. If $B$ is true, that doesn't imply that $A$ is true.
Consider the statement "If it rains, then I will use an umbrella".
I might be someone who uses an umbrella regardless of the weather condition. Observing that I use an umbrella doesn't mean it is raining; I might be using it as a sunshield.