
Re: From Fermat little theorem to Fermat Last Theorem
Posted:
Dec 30, 2012 12:27 PM


On Dec 30, 10:59 am, John Jens <7arcti...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, December 30, 2012 4:33:01 PM UTC+2, Pubkeybreaker wrote: > > On Dec 30, 6:48 am, quasi <qu...@null.set> wrote: > > > > John Jens wrote: > > > > >... =http://primemath.wordpress.com/ > > > > The obvious error is your claim that a < p. > > > > But that error was previously pointed out to you. > > > > And yet you repost the same nonsense. > > > > Did you really fail to understand the previous objections? > > > > Or are you simply trolling? > > > > quasi > > > I also pointed out that modular considerations, such as the one he is > > > using, > > > are known NOT TO WORK. One can not lift results from a local field > > > (i.e. mod p) > > > to a global one (i.e. Q) because SHA is an obstruction to the Hasse > > > Minkowski > > > theorem. > > I'm not using modulus 100% ,just for a < p only 99,99% Hide quoted text  > >  Show quoted text 
Idiot.

