x3+y3=z3{ x }^{ 3 }+{ y }^{ 3 }={ z }^{ 3 }

According to Fermat's Last Theorem, an+bn=cn{ a }^{ n }+{ b }^{ n }={ c }^{ n } have no solutions in positive integers, if n is an integer greater than 2.

But I can (hopefully) only prove x3+y3=z3{ x }^{ 3 }+{ y }^{ 3 }={ z }^{ 3 }.

Expand x3+y3=z3{ x }^{ 3 }+{ y }^{ 3 }={ z }^{ 3 } and you will get (x+y)(x2xy+y2)(x+y)({ x }^{ 2 }-xy+{ y }^{ 2 })

So, x3+y3{ x }^{ 3 }+{ y }^{ 3 }= (x+y)(x2xy+y2)(x+y)({ x }^{ 2 }-xy+{ y }^{ 2 })

Any integer can be expressed as x+yx+y.

Hence, let zz be x+yx+y

(x+y)(x2xy+y2)(x+y)({ x }^{ 2 }-xy+{ y }^{ 2 })=(x+y)3{ (x+y) }^{ 3 }

Dividing both sides by (x+y)(x+y)

x2xy+y2{ x }^{ 2 }-xy+{ y }^{ 2 }=(x+y)2{ (x+y) }^{ 2 }

Expanding (x+y)2{ (x+y) }^{ 2 }, you will get x2+2xy+y2{ x }^{ 2 }+2xy+{ y }^{ 2 }

Simplifying the equation, xy=2xy-xy=2xy

0=3xy0=3xy

Hence, x=0x=0 and y=y=any integer.

OR

x=x=any integer and y=0y=0.

But anybody know that 00 can be a solution.

Note that 00 is a neutral number

Now consider the case, zx+yz\neq x+y

Assume z=k(x+y)z=k(x+y)

Where kk is any integer.

Using graph theory it is easy to realise that there are no rational solutions.

If interested, view Leonhard Euler's proof of this.

#NumberTheory

Note by Luke Zhang
6 years, 4 months ago

No vote yet
1 vote

  Easy Math Editor

This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.

When posting on Brilliant:

  • Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
  • Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
  • Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
  • Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.

MarkdownAppears as
*italics* or _italics_ italics
**bold** or __bold__ bold

- bulleted
- list

  • bulleted
  • list

1. numbered
2. list

  1. numbered
  2. list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
paragraph 1

paragraph 2

paragraph 1

paragraph 2

[example link](https://brilliant.org)example link
> This is a quote
This is a quote
    # I indented these lines
    # 4 spaces, and now they show
    # up as a code block.

    print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.

print "hello world"
MathAppears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3 2×3 2 \times 3
2^{34} 234 2^{34}
a_{i-1} ai1 a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3} 23 \frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2} 2 \sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3 i=13 \sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta sinθ \sin \theta
\boxed{123} 123 \boxed{123}

Comments

@Calvin Lin I think you would like this.

Seems legid but it means that 1=2-1=2. I can't find the error and how to resolve it.

Julian Poon - 6 years, 4 months ago

Only hitch in the solution is that 3xy=0 3xy = 0 does not imply that BOTH x=0 x = 0 and y=0 y = 0 . Only one the statements has to be true.

@Julian Poon . I don't see the problem you're having. Where does 1=2 -1 = 2 ? Or has the note been edited?

Siddhartha Srivastava - 6 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

I dont really think theres a problem with this but @Luke Zhang says that this step isnt valid even though this step is valid to me:

xy=2xy-xy=2xy

However, this step (to me) isn't valid:

1=2-1=2

Since this proof does not have the division by 00, I don't think there is a problem.

Julian Poon - 6 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

For that part you can't prove -1=2 as you will be dividing both sides by 0 which is invalid. No problem with that prove. Just lacking 3 more cases.

Luke Zhang - 6 years, 4 months ago

Please comment about any loop holes (I'm only 14)

Luke Zhang - 6 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

The Boh is right.

Julian Poon - 6 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

The BOH?

Luke Zhang - 6 years, 4 months ago

I still dont think that there is any error in this cause there is no division by 00. It is just proving xx and/or yy is 00.

Julian Poon - 6 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

Yes Julian But I said both x and y bust be 0

Luke Zhang - 6 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

@Luke Zhang THats why there isnt an error.

Julian Poon - 6 years, 4 months ago

Log in to reply

@Julian Poon But there is! As I claimed both x and y must be 0 Why not ask Calvin to vet it?

Luke Zhang - 6 years, 4 months ago
×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...