Re: HOW ARCHIMEDES PROVED FERMAT LAST THEOREM!!!

From: Amadeus Train-Owwell Zirconium (QncyMI_at_netscape.net)
Date: 01/19/05

  • Next message: Bill Dubuque: "Re: No positive integers less than on" 
    Date: 18 Jan 2005 20:33:22 -0800

    your fatuousness knows no bound.

    as I recall from your various proofs, years ago,
    you can never pin-down "iff," or necessity & sufficiency.

    otherwise, you might be able to map the (ordinary) natural numbers
    into the p-adics, which is something that is taken-up
    in the elementary study of p-adic "valuation" ... not that
    I have really understood it.

    as I recall, the typical "real" (archimedean?) valuation is denoted
    with a subscripted infinity-symbol (whereas a subscripted 2 is used
    to indicate 2-adics etc., as you know).

    the question is *not* the apparent value of the adics
    for mathematical physics. Peeah Duh Fermattttt is laughing at you!
    -- Pinochet's Programme for Social Security!
    http://larouchepub.com

  • Next message: Bill Dubuque: "Re: No positive integers less than on"

    Relevant Pages
    • Quantcast