My Math Forum Fermat's last theorem

 Number Theory Number Theory Math Forum

 March 23rd, 2019, 04:19 AM #1 Member   Joined: Aug 2015 From: Chiddingfold, Surrey Posts: 57 Thanks: 3 Math Focus: Number theory, Applied maths Fermat's last theorem Have I found a novel way of expressing Fermat's last theorem as follows? N = nt{ K.A^(3-p)} where N is the number of primitive triples a, b, c and a^p = b^p +c^p and a all values up to A. (K is about .155, 0.152929 for p =1 and 0.159155 for p = 2) For example, this gives for a up to 10,000, P = 1 N = 15292928 (actually 15198740) and for a up to 1000 p = 2 N = 318 (actually 319) p > 2 N = 0 with any values for A and K apart from infinity. Last edited by skipjack; March 29th, 2019 at 06:14 PM.
March 23rd, 2019, 08:09 AM   #2
Math Team

Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 2,266
Thanks: 934

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by magicterry Have I found a novel way of expressing Fermat's last theorem as follows? N =int{ K.A^(3-p)} where N is the number of primitive triples a, b, c and a^p = b^p +c^p and a all values up to A. (K is about .155, 0.152929 for p =1 and 0.159155 for p = 2) For example this gives for a up to 10,000, P = 1 N = 15292928 (actually 15198740) and for a up to 1000 p =2 N = 318 (actually 319) p > 2 N = 0 with any values for A and K apart from infinity.
What are N, K, and A supposed to be?

-Dan

Last edited by skipjack; March 29th, 2019 at 06:14 PM.

March 23rd, 2019, 01:34 PM   #3
Math Team

Joined: Oct 2011

Posts: 14,597
Thanks: 1038

Quote:
 Originally Posted by topsquark What are N, K, and A supposed to be? -Dan
Thou shalt find them 3 critters in the alphabet...

March 28th, 2019, 03:43 AM   #4
Member

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Chiddingfold, Surrey

Posts: 57
Thanks: 3

Math Focus: Number theory, Applied maths
Quote:
 Originally Posted by magicterry Have I found a novel way of expressing Fermat's last theorem as follows? N = int{ K.A^(3-p)} where N is the number of primitive triples a, b, c and a^p = b^p +c^p and a all values up to A. (K is about .155, 0.152929 for p =1 and 0.159155 for p = 2) For example, this gives for a up to 10,000, P = 1 N = 15292928 (actually 15198740) and for a up to 1000 p = 2 N = 318 ( actually 319) p > 2 N = 0 with any values for A and K apart from infinity.
A better expression for N is N = int{ K.A^(2^(2-p))}. This is applying an RMS fit to the plot of N against A and A^p -B^p -C^p = 0
For p =2 K = 1/2.pi according to Alon Amit in Quora.
For p = 1, I get K about 0.152.
with A = 1,000,000 n = 151,981,776,195
For p = >2, N = 0 as long as K is less than one. I wonder whether there is a theoretical relationship between p and K?

Last edited by skipjack; March 29th, 2019 at 06:13 PM.

 March 29th, 2019, 03:13 PM #5 Member   Joined: Aug 2015 From: Chiddingfold, Surrey Posts: 57 Thanks: 3 Math Focus: Number theory, Applied maths Sorry I've got that wrong. Too old (91) and late at night. N = K.A^(3-p) is what I consider to be logical based on extensive examination of a = b + c and a^2 = b^c + b^c. Then for p = 3 we get N = K where N is the number of relatively primitive triples a, b and c. No idea what K is for p > 2 except perhaps always less than one.

 Tags fermat, theorem

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post matqkks Number Theory 1 August 25th, 2018 06:38 AM Lourie Number Theory 3 April 1st, 2017 12:37 AM Rachanesamir Number Theory 2 May 13th, 2015 07:46 AM mente oscura Number Theory 10 June 6th, 2013 08:33 PM xfaisalx Number Theory 2 July 25th, 2010 04:59 AM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Cryptocurrency Forum - Top