Date: Nov 28, 2012 11:51 AM
Author: John Jens
Subject: Re: From Fermat little theorem to Fermat Last Theorem

On Wednesday, November 28, 2012 5:56:06 PM UTC+2, gus gassmann wrote:
> On 28/11/2012 11:19 AM, John Jens wrote:
>

> > If x>p ,x = a + mp , m, natural
>
> > (a + mp)^p?(a + mp)(mod p)=a + mp + kp=a + p(m+k)...
>
> >
>
>
>
> How does any of your stuff work when p = 2? It is simply not sufficient
>
> to claim that a must be less than 2, i.e., equal to 1.


"If a + b - c>=0 because 0<a<=b<c implies b - c < 0 , 0 <= a + b - c < a < p
If a + b - c = 0 see (1)
If a + b - c >= 1 and because a + b - c < a implies a >= 2 and because a < p implies
p > 2. "