Re: Reponses so far
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Jon Perry" <perry@g...> wrote:
> FLT has 3 known solutions, so I suppose no-one cares that muchLast I heard there was only one solution to FLT. Can give refs?
> these days.
> Jon Perry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: physiguy [mailto:physiguy@h...]
> Sent: 28 April 2003 21:10
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: [PrimeNumbers] Responses so far
> So far I've gotten a whole bunch of complaints about my proofs, of
> which I have refuted all of them (see my previous posts and
> reponses) and NOBODY has yet to find any real (several imagined
> problems have been proposed and all refuted) problems with any of
> proofs. Are they really that advanced? Come on people, this isbasic
> number theory. If you really don't think you can handle checkingmy
> proofs please say so, so I don't waste any more of my time. Ifthere
> is somebody who thinks there really is an error, by all means firstname.lastname@example.org
> me. But please, no more nitpicking.
> Unsubscribe by an email to: primenumbers-
> The Prime Pages : http://www.primepages.org/http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
- 'Last I heard there was only one solution to FLT. Can give refs?'
1) The proof given by A. Wiles;
which is easy to prove using identity 52 from
3) My own proof, incomplete, at