Re: Prime numbers, counting tells it all

jstevh@xxxxxxx writes:

Frank J. Lhota wrote:
<jstevh@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1163131549.861525.241370@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
...
So no Andrew Wiles did not prove Fermat's Last Theorem. But he can
rely on supporters around the world claiming he did no matter how many
ways you prove he failed. Their word against the mathematics.

So you've read and understood Andrew Wiles' proof of FLT? If so, and you can
prove that Wiles' proof is in error, you could legitimately earn a place in
Math history. So please, please, *PLEASE* tell us which step in the FLT
proof did Andrew Wiles trip up!


His approach fails by the logical fallacy Cum Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc.

You did not answer his question.

In deductive proofs (like Wiles's and every other mathematical
argument), every step must either be an axiom, an assumption (later
discharged) or follow from previous steps. If a mathematical argument
is fallacious, then there must be some step which satisfies none of
these conditions. Most probably, this would be a conclusion which
does not follow from the premises.

So, what is it? Which step?

Instead of giving a clear answer, you have always stated that the
problem was an informal fallacy about causality. This just is not
possible. Mathematics is a deductive science. Mathematical arguments
do not involve causal or other inductive reasoning[1].

Your answer is rather like my complaint that the Chicago Bears should
have lost last week's game because of the infield fly rule.

It just don't apply.

But just keep wishing.

And in the meantime, figure out which step doesn't follow from the
previous ones.

Footnotes:
[1] Mathematical induction is not "inductive" in the sense I mean.

--
Jesse F. Hughes
Mama: "I had a very good steak when I was in Bonn."
Quincy (Age 4): "A stick? I wish you brought it home. Was it very
big and did it look like a gun?"
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: cantorian algebra
    ... prof. Andrew Wiles, you will notice an enormous amounts of ... Wiles proof has been vetted by mathematicians much more competent at mathematics than HdB will ever be, so if he has doubts about that proof, he will have to search for his alleged errors himsmelf. ... of two inaccessible cardinals" is indeed true and essential to the proof ...
    (sci.math)
  • 1/360X2=0.00555555555 X 19=0.105555555555 =0.1- "YOUR MATHEMATICS PARIS IS BURNING"
    ... DR Andrew Wiles, Dr Edgar Escultura, ... mathematics. ... than you and the Professor Escultura need to go to a candle ... Good day to you, too Sir Andrew Wiles! ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Russian Engineer Proves Fermats Theorem
    ... Fermat’s Last Theorem was proven by Andrew Wiles, a professor of Princeton, in 1994. ... After being tested for about a year, his proofs were deemed accurate and published in the Annals of Mathematics. ...
    (soc.culture.russian)
  • Re: cantorian algebra
    ... prof. Andrew Wiles, you will notice an enormous amounts of ... HdB is not a mathematician (is this surprising after ... It is HdB's competence at mathematics which I was denigrating. ...
    (sci.math)