Re: Gheorghe Ghiata: CONSPIRATION or WHAT?

Dear Prof. George Ghiata,
You'd should be satisfied, that somebody
experienced with FLT problem tried to follow
Your method. You are already paying price for
Your negligence there:
Even P.Fermat in his letter to Mersenne
used to express that the case of n=3 differs
significantly from the case n=5.
Therefore Your suggested substitution of n
to 3 value will violate this difference. Your method
as one specific procedure could operate for n=3
or for some bigger prime but not simultanoeusly for
both of them. Thorough the history of true proofs
of FLT it was also necessary to separate some special
cases for such n , that for example 2^(2n -1) -1
was not again some prime number...
This difference comes because from n=5 and for
bigger primes we should consider possibility, that no
one of X;Y;Z numbers is divided by n.
(so called I-st fall of FLT once for n=3 with P or Q
or 2B+P+Q divided by 3 we passing it into X or Y or
Z divided by 3)
See Your basic parameters in cardinal equation
for n=5: (B+P)^5 + (B+Q)^5 = (B+P+Q)^5
after correct calculations You'll get:
B^5 = 5PQ(2B+P+Q)[2B^2 +2(P+Q)B +P^2 +PQ +Q^2]
from this we should conclude at least:
B will have 5 factor;
once P is relatively prime to Q ( P;Q of gcd =1
also if graetest common divisor = 1 )
so also (2B+P+Q)=W;[2B^2 +2(P+Q)B +P^2 +PQ +Q^2]=R
now once R = 5^(5d-1) r^5
so it will be the case of X;Y;Z not divided by 5 ...
Also consider this as also my former remarks,
With compliments
Ro-Bin
P.S. Ro-Bin is not my nickname but just simple
formula for to serch in my former letters.
On the other hand rules of mathematics are
some kind of never changing beauty and so
on FLT plot seems to be not to cut so easy
like ancient Aleksander the Great used to
cut the Gordian knot...
.