Timeline for Fermat's proof for $x^3-y^2=2$
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 5, 2021 at 17:51 | comment | added | Kieren MacMillan | I believe the answer I just gave, above, is a rigorous version of what you’re suggesting here. | |
| Jul 30, 2015 at 22:05 | comment | added | Wojowu | @Bob Can you prove there is only one representation? | |
| Jul 30, 2015 at 20:45 | comment | added | Bob | Franz - don't know what you mean, y^2=1, count them there is one representation. Never read the book. | |
| Jul 30, 2015 at 18:03 | comment | added | Franz Lemmermeyer | This proof was advocated by Weil in his book "number theory: an approach through history"; Weil of course also identifies the lemma that is missing from the "proof" above: one has to count the number of representations of integers by the form $x^2 + 2y^2$, and this is exactly the point where things get technical. | |
| Jul 30, 2015 at 1:34 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | $x^3=(a^3-6ab^2)^2+2(3a^2b-2b^3)^2$, and also $x^3=y^2+2(1)^2$, but does that imply $(3a^2b-2b^3)^2=1$? | |
| S Jul 29, 2015 at 18:15 | history | suggested | Konstantinos Gaitanas | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Latex Edits
|
| Jul 29, 2015 at 18:08 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jul 29, 2015 at 18:15 | |||||
| Jul 29, 2015 at 18:01 | review | Late answers | |||
| Jul 29, 2015 at 18:16 | |||||
| Jul 29, 2015 at 17:52 | comment | added | Bob | There is more than one way for non-primes, but b^2 = 1 no matter how you write it. | |
| Jul 29, 2015 at 17:46 | review | First posts | |||
| Jul 29, 2015 at 18:16 | |||||
| Jul 29, 2015 at 17:46 | comment | added | Lucia | There may be more than one way of writing numbers in the form $a^2+2b^2$. So the last para doesn't seem clear to me. | |
| Jul 29, 2015 at 17:41 | history | answered | Bob | CC BY-SA 3.0 |