Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Andrew Wiles on proving Fermat’s Last Theorem (1995) [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–46 of 46 posts

Re: Andrew Wiles on proving Fermat’s Last Theorem (1995) [video]

#41

Post by seanhunter »

srean wrote: post #40
seanhunter wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure Fermat didn’t have a proof. For one thing, Fermat wasn’t actually a “professional” mathematician. He was a lawyer and judge and was known for having remarkable intuition but not really troubling himself too much with details of proofs etc. For example Descartes famously called him a “deficient mathematician”[1] in an angry exchange of letters over a technique that Fermat had discovered to geometrically co…

Many accomplished mathematicians were not professional mathematicians. Surprisingly enough, many were in fact lawyers. Descartes was himself a lawyer (by training) then there were Leibnitz, Cayley, Viete. If you include Physics you will get a bigger list. Descartes and Fermat ran a mutual admiration society, don't read to much into it. Both had independently come up with coordinate geometry, linking algebra and geome…

You misunderstand. I have a tremendous respect for Fermat. I just meant he didn’t feel compelled to be totally rigorous. There are examples of contemporaries complaining about him skipping steps and hand waving etc. That was just how he did things.

Re: Andrew Wiles on proving Fermat’s Last Theorem (1995) [video]

#42

Post by srean »

seanhunter wrote: post #41
srean wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many accomplished mathematicians were not professional mathematicians. Surprisingly enough, many were in fact lawyers. Descartes was himself a lawyer (by training) then there were Leibnitz, Cayley, Viete. If you include Physics you will get a bigger list. Descartes and Fermat ran a mutual admiration society, don't read to much into it. Both had independently come up with coordinate geometry, linking algebra and geome…

You misunderstand. I have a tremendous respect for Fermat. I just meant he didn’t feel compelled to be totally rigorous. There are examples of contemporaries complaining about him skipping steps and hand waving etc. That was just how he did things.

Agreed. Modern rigour is, well, quite modern.

Re: Andrew Wiles on proving Fermat’s Last Theorem (1995) [video]

#43

Post by [deleted] »

Daneel_ wrote: post #34
jen729w wrote: post #19

Unfortunately this clip cuts just before the most emotional part. At 01:29 as he's about to break down, he says – this is my memory, sorry, paraphrasing: "Nothing I ever do again…" – and then, having barely held it together for the last 30 seconds, he has to stop. It brings me to tears every time I watch it. A man realising the sheer magnitude of the thing he did. It's the most relevant part for humanity today. Ah! F…

Thank you for linking it. What a powerful moment.

[deleted]

Re: Andrew Wiles on proving Fermat’s Last Theorem (1995) [video]

#44

Post by jackdoe »

jen729w wrote: post #19

Unfortunately this clip cuts just before the most emotional part. At 01:29 as he's about to break down, he says – this is my memory, sorry, paraphrasing: "Nothing I ever do again…" – and then, having barely held it together for the last 30 seconds, he has to stop. It brings me to tears every time I watch it. A man realising the sheer magnitude of the thing he did. It's the most relevant part for humanity today. Ah! F…

Most people never get to do their great work.

Bob Dylan reflecting on his early work https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Fh3pAJf-vdU

I wish to live my life so I can say one day 'Nothing I ever do again will.."

Re: Andrew Wiles on proving Fermat’s Last Theorem (1995) [video]

#45

Post by bell-cot »

elromulous wrote: post #13

(disclaimer: I haven't watched this yet) Mathematicians / folks knowledgeable on the subject - do you think Fermat had an error in his (lost) proof? Or that there exists a solution that perhaps is more straightforward than Wiles's? My understanding is that Wiles had to use a ton of math (and invent some new math?) that had not yet been invented in Fermat's time.

> do you think Fermat had an error

Yes, with million-to-one odds. Though I'd say "error or equivalent shortcoming, for the general case".

> that perhaps is more straightforward than Wiles's?

I don't recall a mathematical definition of "straightforward", but yes. Ignoring minor improvements, I'd guess there's a much better proof...though that might require a century of new developments in related parts of mathematics, before we'll have the necessary tools to write it down.

Post reply on HN