Re: Fermat's Last Theorem simple proof impossible?

first of all, the "missing proof" is the same,
whether outlined any more than is in implicit
in what the Fermat *fils* gave to us.

the other inference is that
the case for n=4 didn't work.

that a)
he find a proof in, say 1650 b)
just write it in the margin c)
wait till 1660 to write a letter about a rpoof
of a very special case d)
so excited by his proof of this case that e),
for (probably) the only time in his life,
he discloses a part of the proof (the infinite descent trick)
and e') keep for himself the general proof of 1650,
never mentioning it, again.

somewhere, a note was found from Fermat
that outlined the proof,

thus:
you don't know what a trigon is?... good;
how about a tetragon?

on a pass/no-fail basis,
it's between zero & one, unless it's pure-imaginary;
if so, can you normalize it to a unit vector?

I think, you can, even though
your highschool careercounselor was stressing the eeuw,
in " y o u don't have to be a rocket scientist;
thanky'!"
.

Quantcast