Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #413035 > unrolled thread

Wiles a failure of math by remaining silent that Euler's FLT was fake Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Wiles a failure of math by remaining silent that Euler's FLT was fake Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2018-05-13 11:36 -0700
    Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-05-14 01:49 +0000

#413035 — Wiles a failure of math by remaining silent that Euler's FLT was fake Re: Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 4:15:10 PM UTC-6, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test 
> 
> Now there is a Science lifelong-generation Test for the past 30 years in General Science (each generation has its science test, and ours is Global Warming). It has but one question, do you believe and accept Global Warming Climate Change, and has never vocalized any opposition to it? If yes, well, you pass, if no, well, you were never a scientist in the first place, never, and science is not for you. 
> 
> Now, Math has a lifelong-generation Test. Here again, only one question is needed. 
> 
> MATH TEST:: 
> 
> Can you provide a Geometry proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus? If not, well, you flunked mathematics.
> Andrew Wiles flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test. 
> 
> But Andrew Wiles stupidity in mathematics does not stop with Calculus, for, Wiles thought he was good at Fermat's Last Theorem, but it turns out. That Wiles was so very very stupid in even Arithmetic, because Euler supposedly proved FLT for exponent 3 and Wiles accepted Euler's fake proof. For Euler forgot that he needed to prove the case of A^3 + B^3 = C^3 had no solutions, Euler forgot to prove in the case of when A,B,C are even numbers. Totally forgot, and so Euler never had a proof of FLT in exp3. Yet when a dumbo of math like Wiles reads Euler's fake proof, it goes in one ear and out the other. You see, Wiles is so much like other mathematicians, they care not about truth in math, they care only about fame and fortune.
> 
(snipped)

konyberg 	wrote:
7:15 AM (6 hours ago)

Translate message to English  

- show quoted text -
Why don't you answer his question; instead of repeating it? 
Or is it that you can't? 
You just not know the mathematics? 
KON 


AP writes::  Yes, Andrew, Andrew Wiles, you know you really cannot remain silent over the issue that Euler failed to give a proof of FLT for the case of exponent 3. Wiles, you really cannot remain silent for if you do, means you agree whole heartedly that Euler made no mistake, no mistake at all.

But clearly Euler flubbed up, screwed up, for his fake proof does not cover the case of when A,B,C are all three even numbers. And no-one to this very day-- except my proof of FLT can cover the even numbers in exp3.

So, Andrew, remain silent, remain stupid in math of Fermat's Last Theorem, because you know as well as I do, that by remaining silent, your FLT is all a fakery. And you are not really a mathematician but a failure of math.

AP

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#413044 — Re: Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium flunked the Math Test of a lifetime-generation test

Archimedes "Failure" Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> writes:

>konyberg 	wrote:
>7:15 AM (6 hours ago)

>Translate message to English 

>- show quoted text -
>Why don't you answer his question; instead of repeating it?
>Or is it that you can't?
>You just not know the mathematics?
>KON


>AP writes::  Yes, Andrew, Andrew Wiles, you know you really cannot remain

Why try to change the topic, Archimedes Failure Plutonium?

KON was asking _you_ (not Wiles) why _you_ (not Wiles) didn't answer the
question.  Is it really because you (not Wiles) can't, or because you (not
Wiles) don't know the mathematics?

<snip more babbling about Wiles>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web