Re: Springer Verlag Publishes âProofâ of Goldbachâs Conjecture (& FLT)
They mean Flt (Fermat's little theorem), not FLT (Fermat's Last Theorem). Jim
Here's the link: http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2009/06/springer_verlag_publishes_proo.h... On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:11 AM, James Propp<jpropp@cs.uml.edu> wrote:
They mean Flt (Fermat's little theorem), not FLT (Fermat's Last Theorem).
Jim
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
-- Mike Stay - metaweta@gmail.com http://math.ucr.edu/~mike http://reperiendi.wordpress.com
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:11 AM, James Propp <jpropp@cs.uml.edu> wrote:
They mean Flt (Fermat's little theorem), not FLT (Fermat's Last Theorem).
Jim
Why do you think this? Mentioning a proof of FLT alongside a "proof" of Goldbach's Conjecture would seem to imply that the proof of FLT is noteworthy. A proof of Flt, even if new, is probably not noteworthy (at least in my opinion). Dave
participants (3)
-
Dave Blackston -
James Propp -
Mike Stay