Academics hate Bitcoin for 51% attack and lack of formal proofs. Theoretically it's not cool invention. Practically, it can change the whole world and be viable economically for a very long time.

Many academics are deeply fascinated by Bitcoin.

The lack of formal proofs has many reasons, not the least of which is that there is no security definition that one could base a proof on. Coming up with a good security definition is going to be a major undertaking. Last year's Turing award was given for the security definition of something much simpler.

It was born on the cypherpunks mailing lists so I assume it has been vetted by the appropriate individuals.