Re: Fermat's proof of FLT

In article <33139038.1172585494893.JavaMail.jakarta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Phuong <Phuong_fermat@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Andrew Wiles' theorem
Suppose that u^p + v^p + w^p = 0 with u, v, w being rational numbers and
p an odd prime, then u.v.w = 0.
From here it follows that a^n + b^n = c^n with a, b, c being positive
numbers and n an odd prime, then a.b.c = 0.
If a.b.c = 0, the triangle ABC does not exist. This is in contradiction
with my proof in which the triangle ABC does if we choose
u = 2^i - t (t - 2^i), v = 2^i + t (t + 2^i) so that cosA = u/v.
So I don't think he had a right proof.

What do you not understand about "n an odd prime"?
--
*** t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~***/
.

Quantcast