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. "