4 ms·
A 200 page proof even if it is correct may not be the most elegant proof for this problem since Fermat noted that his proof was too long to fit on the margin. T
by nyc111 8y ago
A 200 page proof even if it is correct may not be the most elegant proof for this problem since Fermat noted that his proof was too long to fit on the margin. This suggests at most a one page proof.
Also I'm curious if it can be proved that only one proof is possible. There are several independent proofs of the Pythagoras theorem.
- coraltime 8y agoFermat could have been mistaken about his proof, however.
- nyc111 8y agoThat's a possibility. But I still think there must be a more direct proof. A shorter proof that can be understood by anyone who is familiar with Euclid. I believe a proof by using only mathematical methods known to Fermat must be possible.
- Retra 8y agoYou can make any proof as short as you want. Length of proof means almost nothing; it is a function of the language you choose to use.
- nyc111 8y ago> You can make any proof as short as you want. If so why did Wiley choose to write a 200 page proof while he could have stated it in one sentence?
- Retra 8y agoBecause he was writing for a specific class of predetermined parsers, rather than an arbitrary one which was optimized for his proof.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]