Date: Nov 28, 2012 3:07 PM
Author: quasi
Subject: Re: From Fermat little theorem to Fermat Last Theorem

John Jens wrote:

>Corrections was made.
>It's sufficient that only a < p.

But you never _proved_ the inequality a < p, so you don't
get to use it.

Moreover, the equation

a^p + b^p = c^p

with the restrictions

a,b,c positive integers

p prime

does not imply min(a,b) < p.

To see this, just use p = 2 with a,b,c = 3,4,5.

You tried to argue that you can't have p=2 since the
inequality min(a,b) < p would then force min(a,b) = 1,
leading to an easy contradiction. But you can't use the
inequality min(a,b) < p without proving it, and the
example p = 2 with a,b,c = 3,4,5 makes it clear that
you can't prove it.