http://www.newrotor.narod.ru/english.html
[li]A Legend about the Link between Taniyama-Shimura's Hypothesis and Great Fermat's Theorem. [/li][li]The Historical Inaccuracies and Blanks in Simon Singh's Information. [/li][li]The Birth of the Idea of Great Fermat's Theorem Proving. [/li][li]Where is the Logic of Great Fermat's Theorem Proof? [/li][li]Mathematical Errors of Gerhard Frey. [/li][li]Logical Errors of Gerhard Frey Errors. [/li][li]Logical and Mathematical Errors of Ken Ribet. [/li][li]The Mistakes of Andrew Wiles. [/li][li]Conclusions[/li] The indicated peculiarities of Andrew Wiles's proof do not allow to admit that the Great Fermat's theorem is proved.
（The indicated peculiarities of Andrew Wiles's proof do not allow to admit that the Great Fermat's theorem is proved.）
Wiles could not prove the Great Fermat's theorem in full scope.
1. Fermat proved the Great theorem for the special case n=4. Euler proved the Great theorem for the special case n=3. It is well known that Wiles \"proved\" the theorem for the special case n>4.
However some mathematicians assert that Wiles presented a general \"proof\" of the Great theorem. This is not so. A surrogate made of several independent and disconnected proofs of special cases one of which is erroneous and two contradict to each other cannot be a general proof of the theorem. A correct proof should cover all special cases simultaneously.
2. Euler's proof required creation of the theory of complex number. It is well known that Wiles's \"proof\" required creation of the new theories of elliptical curves and modular forms in different areas of mathematics.
Thus, the surrogate \"proof\" of the Great Fermat's theorem is not in keeping with the level of mathematics of Fermat's age and is not the amazing proof, which Fermat mentions in Diophant's book \"Arithmetics\".
3. It is well known that Wiles's \"proof\" is indirect. The studies of the mathematicians do not have a direct relationship to the Great Fermat's theorem proof. It can be admitted that the result of these studies allows to \"assume\" that the Great Fermat's theorem is true.
The assumption is not a proof. | 
发表于 2007-5-23 12:31:29
