
Re: From Fermat little theorem to Fermat Last Theorem
Posted:
Jan 6, 2013 9:47 AM


On Sunday, January 6, 2013 10:56:35 AM UTC+2, M_Klemm wrote: > Hello, > > > > consider the case p =3, proved by Euler. Then you see that the assumption a > > < p in line 4 is not at all justified. > > Regards > Michael
I'm sorry but I don't understand what are you trying to say.

