> It's exactly the same as with Chess

I think you might be missing my point.

My point is that you are probably correct but it is not proven.

If the field that requires verification has an increase in difficulty which exceeds the increase in intelligence, than the capabilities might surpass human months but not by far.

For example, we saw a rapid decrease in space exploration progress after the discovery of the Moon because it is much much more difficult to get to Mars compared to the Moon. What we don't know is what the frontier looks like. It may have a gradual ramp up in difficulty, but it might also involve some sort of cliffs which even artificial intelligence is unable to climb.

How do you verify the ‚beauty‘ of a result. There have always been infinite provable Theorems around. Only some are interesting and beautiful.