HOME | DD

EmmetEarwax [2018-09-24 00:16:53 +0000 UTC]

One last note: The theorem was proven for values of N up to a number too large for even computers to manage, making it hold for ALL practical numbers. Still, this did NOT prove it, as a counter-example might exist for some inconceivably huge N.

So the quest went on ...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

EmmetEarwax [2018-09-24 00:13:11 +0000 UTC]

Three conjectures:

(1) Fermat did have a proof, BUT it was not found among his papers after his decease.

(2) Fermat THOUGHT he had a proof, BUT he had made a mistake in his calculations. Preposterously easy.
(3) Fermat was tweaking & razzing us, to stimulate future researchers.

A Scientific American article in their math column, had him using H.G.Wells' time machine to voyage to the present day, and was astounded to be told of the proof finally found of his theorem. It was this proof the short note referred to.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

EmmetEarwax [2014-03-11 19:02:09 +0000 UTC]

I tried to solve it for N = 3 ,having proven it admitted of no solution for N=4, just to make my arguments complete in my scrap book. My own efforts invariably bogged down .

 I found a proof on the 'net, but, when I came to write it down, I found myself unable to follow the messy logic. It used terms that also involved other terms. I realized that my mathematical skills, once way above average, had faded with age. It was the first indication of being a shadow of my former self. I am also becoming forgetful, and may need a live-in help...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

EmmetEarwax [2014-03-11 18:57:31 +0000 UTC]

Exactly what I searched for. I am a math guy.

There are 3 (three) theories on why Fermat wrote what he did.
(1) Fermat DID have a proof, BUT he lost it before he died and no searching of his papers could find it.
(2) Fermat did NOT have a proof: he just THOUGHT he did, and this is suspected because whole systems of algebra and number theory, unknown in his day, were devised to tackle it. Some proofs have to wrested from an unco-operative cosmos. Until recently , nobody solved the stubborn theorem.
(3) Fermat did NOT have a proof, and, what's more, he knew it. He, as you said, left that cheekly comment to jerk us around. He is long dead, so we can't storm his house and get at him for it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

VeryOdbod [2012-05-20 23:23:03 +0000 UTC]

Brilliant - I used a similar excuse on Facebook once.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

dynjirr [2011-03-27 15:49:26 +0000 UTC]

Haha! Oh Fermat, I love you and your witty comments. If I was a mathematician at that time though, I would have probably cursed him out along with everyone else.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

freak-unique [2009-04-07 02:05:21 +0000 UTC]

this- is simply amazing!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

superclone [2009-02-03 07:58:12 +0000 UTC]

ahh.. its a math thing

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

TheWonderfulHermit [2009-01-31 17:02:51 +0000 UTC]

Haha, that's actually pretty funny How do you actually use a stamp, like in a journal?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

maxaxe [2009-01-29 21:14:57 +0000 UTC]

.... oh hahahaha, i got it when u explained it haha

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ThisFreeHeart [2009-01-29 21:09:28 +0000 UTC]

LOVE IT!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

RoyalBlackheart [2009-01-29 21:01:46 +0000 UTC]

Haha, nice one! STAMP CRAZY,

👍: 0 ⏩: 1