Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Fermat's Last Theorem (FLT)

  1. Sep 18, 2003 #1


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Does anyone have a general idea about how the theorem was proven?

    The details, of course, are not suitable for posting in the forum. What I'd like to find is the general overview of the theorem from which FLT was obtained as a corollary.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 18, 2003 #2
    Respectfully, as one who tried (succeeded?) at this one, all you really need to do is prove is that, for all values of n > 2 the resultant is no longer a right angle triangle.

    At least that was how I went about it, some success, but I suspect it isn't a viable as I would have liked it to be as I ended up needing to sorta take a shortcut to arrive at conclusive proof.
  4. Sep 18, 2003 #3
  5. Sep 18, 2003 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    The story of the proof, and its connection to the Tamiyama-Shimura conjecture, is told here .
  6. Sep 19, 2003 #5
    Had heard that Mr. Wiles had reduced (the length) his proof using some (easier) algebra.......down from the original at 'X' (sorry don't recall right now) hundred pages.
  7. Sep 20, 2003 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    What possible connection could xn+yn= zn for n> 2 have with a right triangle?

    And when you say "the resultant is no longer a right angle triangle", what "resultant" are you talking about??
  8. Sep 20, 2003 #7
    Because at the value of 2 it produces a right angle triangle, Pythagoran (sp?) theorem, and all values greater then 2 (n > 2) will NOT result in a right angle triangle. OK?
  9. Sep 20, 2003 #8


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I think you MEAN that "if you have a triangle with sides of length a, b, c and such that an+ bn= cn with n and integer greater than 2, then the triangle is not a right triangle." That's surely true but I don't see what it has to do with Fermat's Last Theorem. For one thing, it says nothing about a, b, c being integers.
  10. Sep 20, 2003 #9
    No it doesn't, but it is an approach to the problem, none the less.
  11. Sep 22, 2003 #10


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    By the way, to recognize a "church" as a separate entity says nothing about recognizing what it says as true of false- only accepting that it DOES say something. I have a friend who is a professor of religion. She was quick to correct someone who referred to her as a professor of "theology"- her point is that to study something you must believe it exists. To study theology (the study of God) you must believe God exists. To study religion, you only need to believe that religions exist.
  12. Sep 22, 2003 #11
    Kinda off topic are we, please, either PM, or start a new thread.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Similar Discussions: Fermat's Last Theorem (FLT)
  1. Fermat's Last theorem (Replies: 52)

  2. Fermat's Last Theorem (Replies: 9)

  3. Fermat's last theorem (Replies: 0)