The forum discussion centers on a recently proposed proof of Fermat's Last Theorem by Roger Ellman, which claims to be concise and accessible compared to previous lengthy proofs. The proof is presented in a 4-page document available on arXiv, and its validity has not been successfully challenged by prominent mathematicians. However, critics highlight significant flaws, particularly in the clarity and logical structure of the proof, specifically pointing out issues in step 5 regarding the independence of variables.
PREREQUISITESMathematicians, students of mathematics, and anyone interested in the validity and critique of mathematical proofs, particularly those related to Fermat's Last Theorem.
A Concise and Direct Proof of "Fermat's Last Theorem"
Authors: Roger Ellman (The-Origin Foundation, Inc)
Comments: 4 pages. Changes are correction of typographical errors and clearer presentation of latter part.
Subj-class: General Mathematics
The recently developed proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is very lengthy and difficult, so much so as to be beyond all but a small body of specialists. While certainly of value in the developments that resulted, that proof could not be, nor was offered as being, possibly the proof Fermat had in mind. The present proof being brief, direct and concise is a candidate for being what Fermat had in mind. It is also completely accessible to anyone trained in common algebra. That critical suggestions offered by significant mathematics authorities have been unable to invalidate this concise and direct proof would tend to be major confirmation that: The proof stands, valid and not validly challenged.
matt grime said:Apart from the fact it is incredibly badly written, surely the fact that they don't prove that the alleged pattern actually continues should make you slightly suspicious.
page 2 step 5 is also rubbish, since there is no reason that b is independent of x, when it clearly isn't. that do you for starters?