Lieven le Bruyn
But in March 2009, Lieven le Bruyn posted a skeptical investigation
of Atiyah and Sutcliffe's claim:
...where's the icosahedron? The fourth ball sure looks
like one but only because someone added ribbons, connecting the
centers of the different knobs. If this ribbon-figure is an
icosahedron, the ball itself should be another dodecahedron and the
ribbons illustrate the fact that icosa- and dodecahedron are dual
polyhedra. Similarly for the last ball, if the ribbon-figure is an
octahedron, the ball itself should be another cube, having exactly 6
knobs. Who did adorn these artifacts with ribbons, thereby multiplying
the number of "found" regular solids by two (the tetrahedron is
self-dual)?
Quote from Lieven le Bruyn, The Scottish Solids Hoax, from
his blog neverendingbooks,
March 25, 2009.