Fermat's Theorem: Did Fermat Have a Proof?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the question of whether Pierre de Fermat had a proof for his famous Last Theorem. Participants argue that Fermat likely believed he had a simple proof but later found it unworkable, as evidenced by his subsequent publication of proofs for specific cases (n=3 and n=5). The consensus suggests that if a more elementary proof existed, it would have been discovered by the many mathematicians who attempted to solve the theorem over the centuries. Overall, the discussion concludes that Fermat did not possess a universally valid proof for all integers n.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Fermat's Last Theorem
  • Familiarity with mathematical proofs and their validation
  • Knowledge of historical context in mathematics
  • Basic comprehension of number theory concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the historical attempts to prove Fermat's Last Theorem
  • Study Andrew Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem
  • Explore the implications of elementary proofs in number theory
  • Investigate the mathematical techniques used in proofs for specific cases of Fermat's theorem
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, historians of mathematics, and students interested in the development of number theory and the legacy of Fermat's Last Theorem.

Fermat1
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
In your opinion did Fermat have a proof for his theorem?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hey, if Fermat doesn't know!

My opinion (and it is only an opinion) is that what happened is what happens to all of us. Fermat thought that he had a simple proof, wrote a quick note to that effect, then went to bed. And discovered when he tried to carry out the proof, that he it did not work. That is supported by the fact that after he wrote that, he published proofs of the theorem for the cases n= 3 and 5. He wouldn't have done that if he had a proof for all n.
 
HallsofIvy said:
Hey, if Fermat doesn't know!

My opinion (and it is only an opinion) is that what happened is what happens to all of us. Fermat thought that he had a simple proof, wrote a quick note to that effect, then went to bed. And discovered when he tried to carry out the proof, that he it did not work. That is supported by the fact that after he wrote that, he published proofs of the theorem for the cases n= 3 and 5. He wouldn't have done that if he had a proof for all n.

I share your opinion on this. :D
 
To my mind it doesn't really make sense that this kind of problem doesn't have a more elementary (less artificial I mean) solution. Having said that, if Fermat had a proof, he would have written it
 
Fermat said:
To my mind it doesn't really make sense that this kind of problem doesn't have a more elementary (less artificial I mean) solution. Having said that, if Fermat had a proof, he would have written it

Considering the monumental giants who tackled the problem during the centuries it remained unresolved, I tend to think that if a more elementary proof of the theorem existed, it very likely would have been found. :D
 
Definitely agree he did not have a proof that would hold up. I would be very curious to see what it was though.

There was an even better video on the subject I saw once, but this one is also interesting.

 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
8K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K