My Math Forum > Math Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem

 Math General Math Forum - For general math related discussion and news

 June 21st, 2016, 12:56 AM #1 Newbie   Joined: Sep 2015 From: Perth Posts: 18 Thanks: 3 Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem Sorry about this. I was messing about with Fermat's Last Theorem. Could you quickly look at my "proof" and spot the mistake? http://fermatslasttheoremelementary....t-theorem.html
 June 21st, 2016, 02:18 AM #2 Newbie   Joined: Sep 2015 From: Perth Posts: 18 Thanks: 3 Sorry big mistakes back to the drawing board Last edited by mathsman1; June 21st, 2016 at 02:35 AM.
 June 21st, 2016, 02:52 AM #3 Newbie   Joined: Sep 2015 From: Perth Posts: 18 Thanks: 3
 June 21st, 2016, 04:13 AM #4 Newbie   Joined: Sep 2015 From: Perth Posts: 18 Thanks: 3 Sorry guys I give up
 June 21st, 2016, 10:32 AM #5 Math Team   Joined: Jan 2015 From: Alabama Posts: 3,264 Thanks: 902 Thank you.
 June 21st, 2016, 10:42 AM #6 Math Team   Joined: Dec 2013 From: Colombia Posts: 7,674 Thanks: 2654 Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra I'm so surprised that an "aspiring mathematician" failed to solve this in $3 \frac14$ hours.
June 21st, 2016, 11:17 AM   #7
Newbie

Joined: Sep 2015
From: Perth

Posts: 18
Thanks: 3

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Country Boy Thank you.
Has the method using identities like

$b^2+ac-(a^2+bc)= (b-a)(a+b-c)$

been tried and tested to death?

 June 21st, 2016, 11:29 AM #8 Math Team   Joined: Dec 2013 From: Colombia Posts: 7,674 Thanks: 2654 Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra I imagine that (almost) everything simple has been tried and tested to death. There is (almost) certainly no short proof of FLT. If there were, and Fermat knew of it, he would have given it instead of the more limited proof that he did write down.
 June 30th, 2016, 03:50 PM #9 Newbie   Joined: Sep 2015 From: Perth Posts: 18 Thanks: 3 Didn't want to clog the forum up with a new thread to ask this. Does Andrew Wiles, or anyone for that matter, fully understand his proof of Fermat? Supposedly it uses results from outside the specialties of Wiles.
 July 8th, 2016, 05:01 PM #10 Math Team   Joined: Jan 2015 From: Alabama Posts: 3,264 Thanks: 902 There is, in fact, no evidence that Fermat actually had a "simple proof" and considerable evidence that he didn't. Although the note in the margin of a book was not found until after his death, he certainly had the book and was working on problems related to the book before he published proofs for n= 3 and n= 5- thus it is likely that he wrote the note before publishing those proofs. If he had a "simple proof" for all n> 2, he would have published that proof rather than separate proof for n= 3 and n= 5. What happened was what happens to all mathematicians at some time- he thought he had a proof but, on deeper consideration, discovered it did not work. Thanks from topsquark

 Tags fermat, proof, theorem

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post MrAwojobi Number Theory 9 April 14th, 2015 11:59 PM MrAwojobi Number Theory 20 June 16th, 2014 08:32 PM MrAwojobi Number Theory 43 July 15th, 2013 06:27 AM jhon13 Algebra 4 May 24th, 2012 08:26 AM gyro Number Theory 7 May 9th, 2012 07:05 AM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top