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