```Date: Jan 7, 2013 9:01 AM
Author: Pubkeybreaker
Subject: Re: From Fermat little theorem to Fermat Last Theorem

On Jan 7, 8:18 am, "M_Klemm" <m_f_kl...@t-online.de> wrote:> "John Jens" wrote>> > The reason is to prove FLT .> > Let's split in three steps :> > Step 1--> prove a^p + b^p != c^p with a < p ,a,b,c,    naturals> > Step 2--> extend to rationals , still a < p> > Step 3--> pick A >= p, assume  A^p + b^p = c^p and scaling down to A/k < p> > ,k rational -->contradiction to step 2> > If a + b ? c>0 because 0<a?b<c implies b ? c < 0 ,> > 0 ? a + b ? c < a < p> > then a + b ? c ? 1 and because a + b ? c < a implies a ? 2 and because a <> > p implies p > 2 ...> > .... and using binomial theorem>> Is this intended to be a proof of step 1?> If yes, it is essentially correct, because a^p + b^p = c^p together with a <> p implies> a^p + b^p <= a + b^p < p + b^p < (b+1)^p <= c^p, a contradiction.>> The inequality (b+1)^p <= c^p is however not necessaryly true for rational b> and c with b < c.>> Regards> MichaelI have already told him that regardless of the details of what he isdoingthat his proof CAN NOT work.  I gave the reasons why.But of course, like all cranks, he just ignores the reviews fromexpertsand just prattles on.
```