-6

As ridiculous as it may sound, it seems i might have indeed found an elementary proof of Fermat's Last Theorem. But i'm not a well-known person in the mathematical community, and i come from a country where there is not even a single number theory professor to discuss my work with.

I tried submitting the paper to arXiv, but i'm not yet an endorsed author, and it is very difficult to find endorsement, especially if you don't have a lot of ``contacts'' like me. On the other hand, i've learnt from researching on the web that one should never submit to places like viXra.

So i'm kindly requesting if there is anyone here who could assist me in getting my work published ? I'm willing to send this person my paper so that they can also review my argument on their own.

Someone might ask the following question, ``Why wouldn't our purported elementary proof, which is inductive in nature, work for FLT for finite fields ?'' The following would be our response:

Since the Fermat equation $a^{n}+b^{n}=c^{n}$ does indeed has non-zero integer solution $(a,b,c)$ in the finite field $\mathbb{F}_n$ for every integer $n\geq 3$, it follows that our ``inductive" argument wouldn't have a base case. That is, we wouldn't have an n>2 upon which our \induction" could be based.

I could have posted the proof here if it was allowed.

Your assistance would surely be invaluable.

5
  • 6
    It might not be an open problem in your case, but I believe I have solved a famous open problem. How do I convince people in the field that I am not a crank? should still be useful.
    – Anyon
    Jun 24, 2018 at 15:59
  • @Anyon finding an elementary proof of fermat’s last theorem could be reasonably classified as an open problem (though few serious mathematicians would wager money on the existence of such a proof), so I would say this question is a straight-up duplicate, or very nearly so, of the question you linked to.
    – Dan Romik
    Jun 24, 2018 at 18:01
  • 2
    Do you need help in getting the proof “published” as in “being publicly available on the internet” or as in “published in a credible peer reviewed journal”? If it’s the former, uploading to viXra would achieve that goal. If it’s the latter, you’ll need to submit the paper to a good journal and have it pass peer review and be accepted. There are no shortcuts, so I don’t see what kind of help you’re looking for. As for arXiv, there’s nothing that uploading your paper to arXiv would achieve for the credibility of your proof that uploading to viXra wouldn’t, so that idea is neither here nor there.
    – Dan Romik
    Jun 24, 2018 at 18:14
  • 2
  • 1
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's not a question. "Can you help me with ____" is not exactly within scope either since the answer is either yes or no, and each person asked will have a different response. For the undertones involved, the question Anyon linked is the most relevant. In any case there's nothing left to answer.
    – Allure
    Jun 24, 2018 at 21:33

1 Answer 1

6

Let me be very bold, but please do not take it personally.

Have you considered that it may sound ridiculous because it may as well be? Do you realize how unlikely it is that someone without an academic knowledge/presence in math comes with a solution for such a famous problem? Have you considered that perhaps you are wrong? Interestingly, viXra is full of papers claiming elementary proofs of Fermat's Last Theorem... Go figure.

You should read: I believe I have solved a famous open problem. How do I convince people in the field that I am not a crank?


EDIT: On second thoughts, and I agree with @Najib Idrissi.

As a solution consider this:

If you want to have feedback you can always post in math.stackexchange.com for a second opinion on your proof. Posts there are dated and have your name on it, and if you put the preprint anywhere in the web (including viXra) you can make sure its owned by you. Occam's Razor tells me that the probable outcome of this is that someone teaches you some maths and you learn from it. In the less probable case that you are right, then you do have a preprint somewhere and can start considering publication in some very reputable journal.

7
  • 4
    While I agree with your main point, you give two pieces of bad advice. 1. Don't post on viXra unless you want to be labeled a crank for life. 2. Don't ask for verification of your proof on math.SE. The probable outcome is not getting taught some math. The probable outcome is getting your question closed and deleted.
    – user9646
    Jun 24, 2018 at 15:11
  • @Andre, youre right, the odds are firmly against me, but i believe that stranger things have happened in history. You might want to know that my argument is based on the Perez-Cacho criterion, which is far less famous, but seemingly more elegant, than the original problem statement of Fermat. The Perez-Cacho criterion states that FLT for the exponent $2m-1$, where $m>1$ is an integer, is equivalent to the statement that the equation $(xy)^{m}=x+y$ has only the trivial solution $xy=0$ in $\mathbb{Q}$.
    – ABD.
    Jun 24, 2018 at 15:12
  • @Najib Idrissi, spot on. As far as i know, no one takes anything on viXra seriously, and proof verification posts on Math Stack Exchange/ Math Overflow are quickly voted for closure.
    – ABD.
    Jun 24, 2018 at 15:15
  • @NajibIdrissi ah, now that I read the math.SE rules I do agree with you. Same with viXra, its full of crap, but I have heard of some serious papers there. Interestingly , its full of Fermats last theorem proofs. Jun 24, 2018 at 16:40
  • 5
    @DanRomik I use that word because OP used it. The point is that I was triying to be bold and try to make OP go trough a reality check, I am not saying he is ridiculous, nor that what he does is ridiculous, but just to consider the possibility that he may be wrong. "You are an idiot"-> personal. "Your argument is flawed"-> non personal. I am trying for the second. No need to stir the bees nest Jun 24, 2018 at 19:23

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .