I bet /sci/ can't even do a simple mathematical proof.

Thread replies: 13
Thread images: 1

Anonymous
2017-01-13 02:24:01 Post No. 8598495
[Report] Image search: [Google]

File: 1419256732736.jpg (68KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:24:01 Post No. 8598495 [Report]

I bet /sci/ can't even do a simple mathematical proof.

Prove the following statement:
For any integer n greater than 2, no three integers x, y and z exist so that x^n + y^n = z^n. (with x,y,z > 0, n > 2)

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:26:24 Post No.8598500
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:26:24 Post No.8598500 [Report]

I haven't tried it myself, but induction seems like a reasonable approach.

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:27:39 Post No.8598504
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:27:39 Post No.8598504 [Report]

>>8598495
>I bet /sci/ can't even do a simple mathematical proof.

So?
You feel better than us?
Good for you.

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:29:54 Post No.8598511
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:29:54 Post No.8598511 [Report]

>>8598495
I wrote out a truly marvelous proof of this, which this comment box is too small to contain.

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:31:59 Post No.8598518
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:31:59 Post No.8598518 [Report]

>>8598511
>using an infinite countable amount of characters to write a proof

are you STUPID, kid?

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:34:53 Post No.8598527
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 02:34:53 Post No.8598527 [Report]

I found an elegant proof but your brain is too small to contain it :>)

Anonymous 2017-01-13 03:58:38 Post No.8598662
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 03:58:38 Post No.8598662 [Report]

>>8598495
>tfw too intelligent for proofs

Anonymous 2017-01-13 04:05:27 Post No.8598675
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 04:05:27 Post No.8598675 [Report]

>>8598511
Nice :D

Anonymous 2017-01-13 04:20:16 Post No.8598701
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 04:20:16 Post No.8598701 [Report]

>>8598511

i like to think he was just fucking around with the reader, and didn't really have a proof.

Anonymous 2017-01-13 04:27:12 Post No.8598716
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 04:27:12 Post No.8598716 [Report]

have there been any shorter proofs since wiles?
something that might actually fit in a few /sci/ posts?

Anonymous 2017-01-13 06:01:24 Post No.8598865
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 06:01:24 Post No.8598865 [Report]

>>8598500
>>8598518
>not knowing what Fermat's Last Theorem is and who Andrew Wiles is
>>>/b/

Anonymous 2017-01-13 06:09:46 Post No.8598886
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 06:09:46 Post No.8598886 [Report]

>>8598865
thank you for pointing out any subtle humor with a giant red foam finger, in case I missed it

Anonymous 2017-01-13 06:13:29 Post No.8598893
[Report]

Anonymous 2017-01-13 06:13:29 Post No.8598893 [Report]

>>8598701
The theory is he used the method of descent, but his proof would have hinged on something to do with roots in the complex unit circle. That proof was proposed and shown to be fallacious.

I'm aware that Imgur.com will stop allowing adult images since 15th of May. I'm taking actions to backup as much data as possible. Read more on this topic here - https://archived.moe/talk/thread/1694/

I'm aware that Imgur.com will stop allowing adult images since 15th of May. I'm taking actions to backup as much data as possible.
Read more on this topic here - https://archived.moe/talk/thread/1694/