- On Thu, 30 August 2001, paulmillscv@... wrote:
> I am very happy to present my proof of Fermat's Last Theorem

In lemma 3.2 you say "otherwise x, y, z would not be pairwise coprime", however nowhere have you stated that they ought to be pairwise coprime (note that it is the first mention of the term in the document).

> http://members.tripod.co.uk/comms1/fidn1/fermat.html

Then you procede to perform "division".

By this stage are you in a ring or a field?

Either way, which one?

To be honest, this kind of post is better off discussed on the newsgroup sci.math, where there are several people who debunk two elementary proofs of FLT before breakfast each day.

Phil

Phil

Mathematics should not have to involve martyrdom;

Support Eric Weisstein, see http://mathworld.wolfram.com

Find the best deals on the web at AltaVista Shopping!

http://www.shopping.altavista.com - I will have to put the paper on the Interne; and then send another message.Peter----- Original Message -----
**From:**Peter Lesala**Sent:**Sunday, October 20, 2013 8:27 PM**Subject:**[PrimeNumbers] Fermat's Last TheoremRecently I completed a paper to prove Fermat's Last Theorem. I would like a feed back from members of this group before trying to publish the paper.

Thank you.

{eter/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]