How Does Dimensional Analysis Apply to Fermat's Last Theorem and Beyond?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Antonio Lao
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dimension
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the application of dimensional analysis to Fermat's Last Theorem, particularly focusing on the implications of varying the exponent n in the equation a^n + b^n = c^n. It includes theoretical considerations and speculative reasoning about the relationships between dimensions and mathematical principles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests using dimensional analysis in relation to Fermat's Last Theorem, proposing that the exponent n represents dimension.
  • The same participant notes that for n=2, the equation represents the Pythagorean theorem, providing the example of the triple (3, 4, 5).
  • It is claimed that as n increases from 2 to infinity, the right-hand side (RHS) of the equation becomes progressively larger than the left-hand side (LHS), leading to a conclusion about the principle of holism.
  • Another participant challenges the conclusion, stating that the only valid conclusion is that 3^n + 4^n = 5^n is not true for n not equal to 2.
  • A later post introduces a new topic regarding the spatial dimensions of an n-sphere and an n-cube, questioning at what dimension their volumes become equal.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the implications of varying n in the context of Fermat's Last Theorem. There is no consensus on the conclusions drawn about the relationship between dimensions and the validity of the equation for different values of n.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes speculative reasoning and interpretations that depend on the definitions of dimensions and mathematical principles. The implications of fractional values of n and the nature of the quantum aspect of numbers are also mentioned but remain unresolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring the intersections of dimensional analysis, number theory, and mathematical philosophy.

Antonio Lao
Messages
1,436
Reaction score
1
What is done in the following might be considered as “not mathematical.” Nevertheless we must be allowed to use crazy ideas if only for the sake of exploring the uncharted domains of human mathematical logic.

This is not to prove again the famous math problem called Fermat’s Last Theorem. The proof was done by Andrew Wiles in the 1990s. But use it in relation to dimensional analysis.

The algebraic equation is [tex]a^n +b^n = c^n[/tex] The exponential number n, in our discussion, is the dimension. For the case where n=2, the equation is called the Pythagorean theorem and its solutions are the Pythagorean triples. For our purpose, we only need one of these triples: a=3, b=4, c=5. The equations becomes [tex]3^2+4^2=5^2[/tex]. The left-hand (LHS) side is always equal to the right-hand side (RHS).

When n=3, the RHS is bigger than the LHS. When n=4, the RHS is even bigger than the LHS. It can be noted that, as n increases from 2 to infinity, the RHS becomes progressively bigger and bigger. We can make the conclusion that at n=infinity, the principle of holism is vindicated. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And no matter how many parts are added together, the sum is always less than the whole.

Likewise, it can be shown that if n is less than 2, the reverse happens, the RHS becomes smaller than the LHS. And if we allow n to take on fractional value, the RHS becomes progressively smaller and smaller than the LHS. So that when n=0, the quantum nature of number becomes apparent (1 + 1 > 1).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by Antonio Lao

Well spoken Antonio.
 
Originally posted by Antonio Lao

When n=3, the RHS is bigger than the LHS. When n=4, the RHS is even bigger than the LHS. It can be noted that, as n increases from 2 to infinity, the RHS becomes progressively bigger and bigger. We can make the conclusion that at n=infinity, the principle of holism is vindicated. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

No. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that [itex]3^n +4^n = 5^n[/itex] is not true for [itex]n\neq 2[/itex].
 
Thanks for all your replies.

For the next discussion is that of an n-sphere and an n-cube.
What spatial dimension makes their volumes equal?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
3K