It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# British mathematician solves Fermat's Last Theorem

page: 1
9
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:56 PM
When I saw that title I felt for a second nonspecific infected me with mandela effect but no this is news now

www.upi.com...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

In 1994, Andrew Wiles shocked the math world when he published proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem, which is a problem that had bewildered scholars for more than 300 years. On Tuesday, the 62-year-old Oxford professor was awarded the prestigious 2016 Abel Prize for his work by the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters, Tech Times reports.

In May he will fly to Oslo where the Crown Prince Haakon of Norway will present him with the award and a \$700,000 check for the accomplishment that the academy described as “an epochal moment for mathematics,” according to The Telegraph.

I remember this was big news in my house at the time, i think my old man worked at nights in secret trying to solve Fermat last theorem homer Simpson style

And when someone solved he sob a little.

I made a thread a while ago about homer Fermat solution if you want to check (man my threads still are crap and haven't improve
)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So this is news now because in 1908 a German made a price of 100,000 gold marks to anyone that could give a complete proof to the theorem, but it had an expiration of 100 years, so if no one could find the proof by 2007, the price was off, after many fail attempts Wiles finally came with the solution, something complicated using elliptic curves... hard stuff.

And after more than 20 years he is finally getting the 1908 price, about \$700K on today money,

Why did it take so long? no idea, i bet they were waiting to see if the guy died before losing the money

ETA: ignore all this, the price the man is getting is a different price, equivalent to the Nobel price but for math
edit on 17-3-2016 by Indigent because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 10:21 PM

Without meaning to sound disrespectful to the guys achievement in solving the equation buttttttttt, what purpose does the equation serve ?

Will knowing the answer now offer any new avenues to furthering the advancement of society ?

I've never been a fan of mathematics beyond simple addition/subtraction/percentiles as the all letters in algebra, quadratic equations etc and the rules just didn't work well with me as a person who has to always question "why is it this way?" I mean I did well in statistics, I can do just fine with Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient and other statistical related equations which to me seems way more complex than the equation this guy solved but I still don't understand the "why" behind it all, as in the origins and how they decided it would be XY instead of GF.

You know it just seems so contrived to me but I've wandered a little off topic

So back to the question, why did this guy spend pretty much a life time trying to solve this equation ? What is the importance of it ? Or did he just attempt to solve it because he wanted to and there are no real practical uses for the equation ?
edit on 17/3/16 by Discotech because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 10:33 PM

Why would someone climb a mountain, why would someone go to the bottom of the sea, what is the importance of going to the moon?

First, you don't have a problem with an unanswered question for centuries?

Second solving it is meaningless, apart for the accomplishment of being the first in doing what no one could do, and developing math tools that can be applied to solving other problems. like all the technology derived from going to the moon, or the bottom of the sea, it's the same with solving a theorem.

You know the pc you use, you can use it in part because over centuries people develop complex math that may had no use at the moment

Solving Fermat last theorem is no different to an artist making art, it expands culture.
edit on 17-3-2016 by Indigent because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-3-2016 by Indigent because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 10:34 PM
Thats awsome that he is getting the prize.
While it was still up in the air if he had proved fermats theorem, i was taking multivariable calculas/ linear algebra, and our proffesor had gone over the proposed proof lightly.
Then while on a several hr road trip see my mom, and my ex was driving, i had an epiphaney and for a few fleeting moments i thought i had proved it during a thought experiment. In those brief seconds it was all very clear, but as quickly the line of reasoning came to me it was gone.

And what do you mean by the mandela effect?, the mistaken thought that mandela had died but didnt?

If so Holy Moly

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 10:40 PM

If I remember correctly the man presented a flawed proof first, and after summiting it he realize his mistake, can you imagine your work destroyed for a typo

Yeah the Mandela effect is that people thinks something happened before but it didn't, like Mandela diying every year before his actual death, when I saw the title of the article i was like deja vu, but the timeline is safe, journalist are just crappy with their headlines

edit on 17-3-2016 by Indigent because: Tablet autocorrect is stronger

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 11:06 PM

Well discovery and exploration of physical objects is a little different to mathematics equations.

The problem I have is, why even come up with the equation in the first place ? Also how does one invent an equation that is unsolvable ?

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 11:15 PM
I asked about the mandela thing, because my brother and i experienced it at the same time.
We used to work together, and one day while we were both in the office I saw something in the news about mandela and i could have sworn he had died. When I mentioned it to my brother, he had thought that mandela had died as well.
We both remembered specific details of his death and funeral, along with a couple of other events that we thought had transpired, but evidently hadn't.
The really weird part is that as time progressed neither of us could remember details of the other events that hadn't transpired.
So, its a known phenomena then?
Hmm, there HAS been a change in the universe.
Its just like the game, Bioshock infinite, every time the character Elizabeth opens a tear in timespace, into another universe, the next universe might be exactly the same, but not.

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 11:30 PM

Math is a language, to explore the world you need math to put your results in a paper, you can say the mountain is tall but that does not say much, or you can say the mountain is exactly x miles tall, the more complex your observations, the more complex the math needed to describe it, you cannot explore the physical world without math.

How does one come with an unsolvable equeation? First it was solvable it took 350+ years but it got solved, how he came with it, he was a genius, he saw the world in a way us regulars can't and he himself could not prove it, it took the implementation of 350+ years of combined knowledge to do it.

That's the importance of it.

The elliptic curves used to solve the theorem are the base of current encryption.

Tldr, math is just a way to write what you observe, he dint saw a number that fit the equation, it took more than 350 years to proof no number can fit the equation.
edit on 17-3-2016 by Indigent because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 01:14 AM

i used to feel the exact same way about math, and not because i didn't understand it. i got a 770 in math on my sats. (perfect score is 800). in college, finally, i had a breakthrough about math. yes, tons of math conventions ARE arbitrary. but the math itself is not. it's helpful to think of the conventions as different languages, like measuring temperature in fahrenheit or celsius or kelvin. it doesn't matter which one you use, they all tell you what temperature it is now and how much it has changed. sure, aliens might count in base 23 instead of base 10. it doesn't change the fact that both counting systems will tell you how many apples are on a tree. the theorem was "only a theory" until it was proven, similar to a science experiment.

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 03:08 AM

The quirks of numbers often present stumbling blocks to those interested in quantum level physics. The more solutions there are to mathematical problems, the more potential there is for fellows with chalk in hand and the universe turning behind their eyeballs, to solve big problems and figure out ways to exploit quantum mechanics more effectively.

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 08:44 AM

originally posted by: Indigent

I remember this was big news in my house at the time, i think my old man worked at nights in secret trying to solve Fermat last theorem homer Simpson style

Well, I wouldn't know even where to start to prove (is disprove) Fermat's Last Theorem; however, I find Homer Simpson's chalkboard scribblings to be very insightful (not the Fermat Theorem part, the part with the donut).

If a donut isn't a donut without a hole in the middle, then it is clear that the hole is an integral part of the donut. Therefore, when I eat the donut cake that surrounds the donut hole, I am not left with nothing, because I am still left with the hole -- which, as mentioned above, was postulated not to be "nothing", but to actually be an integral part of the donut.

Homer Simpson is a very deep thinker indeed.

edit on 3/18/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 09:13 AM

For those wondering what "Fermat's Last Theorem" is all about.

"This theorem was first conjectured by Pierre de Fermat in 1637 in the margin of a copy of Arithmetica where he claimed he had a proof that was too large to fit in the margin. The first successful proof was released in 1994 by Andrew Wiles, and formally published in 1995, after 358 years of effort by mathematicians. The unsolved problem stimulated the development of algebraic number theory in the 19th century and the proof of the modularity theorem in the 20th century. It is among the most notable theorems in the history of mathematics and prior to its proof, it was in the Guinness Book of World Records as the "most difficult mathematical problem", one of the reasons being that it has the largest number of unsuccessful proofs"

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 18-3-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 09:20 AM
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I have a counter argument.

It revolves around the fact that not all donuts have holes. Some donuts are oblate spheroids, as opposed to toroid in geometry. Therefore, since a hole is not necessary to the form of a donut, the hole cannot be said to be an integral part of the donut, but instead is an absence of donut.

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 09:33 AM

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

It revolves around the fact that not all donuts have holes. Some donuts are oblate spheroids, as opposed to toroid in geometry. Therefore, since a hole is not necessary to the form of a donut, the hole cannot be said to be an integral part of the donut, but instead is an absence of donut.

I hereby initiate The "Soylent Green Prize" for solving Simpson's Last Theorem:

I'll present a prize of a half-dozen Krispy Kremes to the first person who can prove or disprove that doughnuts without holes are still doughnuts. It needs to be proved through mathematics, not just by arbitrary dictionary definitions, or doughnut vendor definitions. I think those definitions are wrong.

edit on 3/18/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 11:23 AM

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

It revolves around the fact that not all donuts have holes. Some donuts are oblate spheroids, as opposed to toroid in geometry. Therefore, since a hole is not necessary to the form of a donut, the hole cannot be said to be an integral part of the donut, but instead is an absence of donut.

I hereby initiate The "Soylent Green Prize" for solving Simpson's Last Theorem:

I'll present a prize of a half-dozen Krispy Kremes to the first person who can prove or disprove that doughnuts without holes are still doughnuts. It needs to be proved through mathematics, not just by arbitrary dictionary definitions, or doughnut vendor definitions. I think those definitions are wrong.

Don't need math for this one.

You yourself keep referring to it as a doughnut. What else would you call it?

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 11:53 AM
There is another episode where Homer is talking with Stephan Hawking and Hawking says (in his beautiful robotic voce), "I find your theory of a donut shaped universe very interesting!"

The top equation (the one with Pi*(1/srt(37))^8 etc) is an approximation of the Higgs Boson! And this like a year, maybe two, before the LHC announcement!

The second is counter example to Fermat's Last Theorem.

Third, not sure. Omega (t sub 0) > 1 ??? Could be a reference to the end of time??

Fourth, the ouroboros donut of infinity! That is what I want to call it!

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 12:11 PM

originally posted by: Discotech

Without meaning to sound disrespectful to the guys achievement in solving the equation buttttttttt, what purpose does the equation serve ?

Will knowing the answer now offer any new avenues to furthering the advancement of society ?

...
So back to the question, why did this guy spend pretty much a life time trying to solve this equation ? What is the importance of it ? Or did he just attempt to solve it because he wanted to and there are no real practical uses for the equation ?

Fermat's Last Theorem has definite real world applications. How do you find area? L x W, right? How do you find volume? L x W x H. Fermat was thinking, "To find the total square area is easy, you just sum it up," i.e., a^2 + b^2 = c^2. And for that family of equations there are infinite answers.

Fermat was reading the book and had an answer for finding volumes which is what his note in the margin says, "I've got it but not enough room to write it down here." And that statement has stumped mathematicians for over 300 years! The easiest next order is cubes (x^3) and you always end up with a "1" left over when you sum everything up. So think about it. You cannot add volumes up to an evenly distributed amount with out having something left over. Makes knee surgery that more complicated! And filling up toothpaste tubes... you get the idea.

I think the world was looking for an elementary proof and not one that involved 6 dimensions and partial diff eqs along elliptical curves (Wile's proof).
edit on 18-3-2016 by TEOTWAWKIAIFF because: grammar nazi

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 12:31 PM
Just why is it, when one counts down their fingers from ten, thumb ten, little finger 6, then add the 5 from the other hand, it makes 11?

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 01:31 PM

originally posted by: pikestaff
Just why is it, when one counts down their fingers from ten, thumb ten, little finger 6, then add the 5 from the other hand, it makes 11?

You're counting the 6th twice.

10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 pinky

So

(5) + 5 = 10
edit on 18-3-2016 by Psychonautics because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 05:46 PM

Andrew Wiles on his discovery:

Fermat's Last Theorem, without a solution, was preventing other problems from being solved. For instance, in elliptic curves (used in cryptography), the Modularity Theorem was solved, in part, by Andrew Wiles during his pursuit of FLT.
en.wikipedia.org...

If you want to see how complex the world of Modular Forms is, watch this for a few minutes (starting around 12 minutes):
vimeo.com...

Ideas like this add new tools to solving difficult mathematical problems. And this was just one piece of the proof used to solve FLT.

Admittedly, there is no great practical use for this... yet.

Here is an example of why that's OK (story about Neil Degrass Tyson's graduate professor):

Essentially, you have to develop understanding, then prove its truth, then find its uses, then create "the thing" to exploit those uses. Remember, humans use to run from fire... before they harnessed it.

And why not pursue something for the sake of its pursuit, and not just its application? Do you pursue a woman solely for the sake that she can apply her body to manufacture a baby?

Mathematics takes a while for other fields to absorb:
imgs.xkcd.com...

edit on 3/18/2016 by Protector because: Links didn't work correctly.

edit on 3/18/2016 by Protector because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

9