Timeline for Proving non-existence of solutions to $3^n-2^m=t$ without using congruences
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 21, 2022 at 18:03 | history | edited | Glorfindel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
broken link fixed, cf. https://meta.mathoverflow.net/q/5301/70594
|
| Jul 1, 2010 at 6:32 | comment | added | Kevin Buzzard | I'm going to accept this answer because I'm not sure I'm going to get any better than this. I was wondering whether someone would try some sort of heuristic argument to justify that congruences should be enough, but perhaps this paper is evidence that the heuristic will work. | |
| Jul 1, 2010 at 6:31 | vote | accept | Kevin Buzzard | ||
| Jun 30, 2010 at 13:21 | comment | added | Kevin Buzzard | It's Problem 8.01 in the paper. My understanding is that they're suggesting that congruences should be enough in this special case, based presumably on the wealth of such equations that they solve in this way in the paper. | |
| Jun 30, 2010 at 11:45 | history | answered | Gjergji Zaimi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |