Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven?
 

Unlike scientific theories that are sometimes eventually shown to be wrong, generally accepted math proofs have never, to my knowledge, been overturned. Some like the proof that there is no largest prime, or that the harmonic series converges are so obvious that the odds it isn't true are greater than one in a googol (but less than one in a googolplex). More complex accepted proofs might be a quintillion to one favorites to be true.

But Wiles proof is different. It is lenghty, complex, has no obvious connection to the original question, and most importantly has only been double checked by a large handful of people. Furthermore I believe there is a probability argument that would allow Fermat's Theorem to have no counterexamples because of "chance". Also its proof had escaped the best minds for 500 years.

Personally I would take 100,000 to one odds that Wiles proof will eventually be shown to have a flaw. That's an exceedingly low number regarding a math proof, I think. But I am very unknowledgeable in this field. I wonder therefore what professional mathmeticans would make the odds.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven!
 

[ QUOTE ]
But I am very unknowledgeable in this field.

[/ QUOTE ]

i wish i was as unknowledgable as you. Being overly modest is both stupid and disgusting. kinda like announcing "answered" prayers.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven!
 

Just an example of a mathematical theory that has been considered to be refuted is set theory. I don't claim to be a mathematical expert but I just thought I'd throw that out there.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven!
 

"Being overly modest is both stupid and disgusting."

I wasn't being modest regarding this subject. Actually I don't think I'm overly modest about any subject.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven!
 

I'm talking about a proof, not a theory.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven!
 

[ QUOTE ]
"Being overly modest is both stupid and disgusting."

I wasn't being modest regarding this subject. Actually I don't think I'm overly modest about any subject.

[/ QUOTE ]

ya, i was joking. maybe i should've used a smiley face. don't forget that you should still value the fact that you know enough to truly know you're unknowledgable.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I am very unknowledgeable in this field.

[/ QUOTE ]

i wish i was as unknowledgable as you. Being overly modest is both stupid and disgusting. kinda like announcing "answered" prayers.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I've read here, sklansky is many things. Overly modest is not one of them.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven?
 

[ QUOTE ]
proof that there is no largest prime, or that the harmonic series converges are so obvious that the odds it isn't true are greater than one in a googol (but less than one in a googolplex).

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no way you can come up with these numbers with any degree of accuracy.

You might as well say 'small enough to be considered negligible'

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven?
 

I assumed that the only way these proofs are wrong is if every relevant molecule in everyone's brains was randomly twisted. Thats's between a googol and a googolplex to one.

Re: Was Fermat\'s Theorem Really Proven?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I assumed that the only way these proofs are wrong is if every relevant molecule in everyone's brains was randomly twisted. Thats's between a googol and a googolplex to one.

[/ QUOTE ]

From my experiences with humanity, I'd say that everyone's brain is randomly twisted in some way. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]