Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dartvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!edsel!bentley!hoxna!houxm!mhuxj!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!dartvax!chuck From: chuck@dartvax.UUCP (Chuck Simmons) Newsgroups: net.math Subject: Re: Fermat's Last Theorem Message-ID: <2679@dartvax.UUCP> Date: Sun, 6-Jan-85 21:12:16 EST Article-I.D.: dartvax.2679 Posted: Sun Jan 6 21:12:16 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 8-Jan-85 03:47:46 EST References: <1622@sdcrdcf.UUCP> <1598@psuvax1.UUCP> Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH Lines: 18 > The missing proof of Fermat's Last Theorem has been rediscovered. >The proof is elementary, zigzag, and truly wonderful as claimed by Fermat >nearly three and a half centuries ago. The relation > p p p >x + y = z for any prime p > 2 is called Case I if none of the solution >integers x, y, z is divisible by p and Case II if one of the integers is >divisible by p. In this article, unlike the classical work, we show >first the nonexistence of Case II and the the impossibility of Case I. This subject interests me greatly. Does a valid simple proof along these lines really exist? Or are you just pulling my gullible leg? I would appreciate hearing about any followups and would love to see the proof (or at least a more complete outline) if it does exist. Thanks, dartvax!chuck