Prev: If - this statement is used to open an exact proof p = np, if this is true or false, do this.
Next: Looking for: Functional Equation
From: ThinkTank on 7 May 2010 09:02
Why do you think my response would be any different? I stand by my response. Furthermore, see my replies to Pubkeybreaker.
From: ThinkTank on 7 May 2010 09:11
> It's certainly possible that you *misspoke* when you
> said "an
> isomorphism between the integers and the reals".

Get your facts straight. See my response to Pubkeybreaker.
From: ThinkTank on 7 May 2010 09:14
Also, see my response to Pubkeybreaker below. I make the connection quite clear.
From: ThinkTank on 7 May 2010 09:42
>
> I mean, the OP certainly appears to be misguided and
> misinformed at
> best; but I think the reason you gave isn't one of
> the best reasons to
> suspect that the OP has a poor understanding of
> number theory.


Well, apparently I have a better understanding of number theory than anybody else who has criticized me (which is not a huge surprise). See my reply to Pubkeybreaker regarding the DEEP connection between FLT and FPNT.
From: A on 7 May 2010 14:09
On May 7, 1:42 pm, ThinkTank <ebigl...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > I mean, the OP certainly appears to be misguided and
> > misinformed at
> > best; but I think the reason you gave isn't one of
> > the best reasons to
> > suspect that the OP has a poor understanding of
> > number theory.
>
> Well, apparently I have a better understanding of number theory than anybody else who has criticized me (which is not a huge surprise).  See my reply to Pubkeybreaker regarding the DEEP connection between FLT and FPNT.


I am afraid it's true that the proper context for FLT, in which the
right language and tools exist to solve it, is the language of
Langlands correspondences; taken as a statement in elementary number
theory and attacked with only the methods of elementary number theory
(e.g. methods available to Fermat) a proof would be nearly impossible
to render. It's most plausible that Fermat's "proof" of FLT was
something similar to Kummer's purported proof of FLT, which was quite
clever but ultimately failed due to problems with non-unique
factorizations in certain number fields.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Prev: If - this statement is used to open an exact proof p = np, if this is true or false, do this.
Next: Looking for: Functional Equation