[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 87 KB, 640x400, Quiz.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389730 No.1389730 [Reply] [Original]

Let's separate the true /sci/borgs from the summer kids.

>> No.1389743

I lol'd

>> No.1389744

Yeah, did it less than five minutes. Easy.

Answer won't fit in this post though.

>> No.1389746

and I'm pretty sure we can also separate the people who are willing to help you on your homework and the people who are smart enough to see this is a homework thread

>> No.1389747

>>1389744
lol'd

>> No.1389751

1782^12 + 1841^12 = 1922^12

>> No.1389752

No solutions

>> No.1389753
File: 45 KB, 436x435, 1233756790184.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389753

>>1389744

>> No.1389757
File: 17 KB, 275x301, troll.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389757

>> No.1389760

>lol I post an impossible problem with a taunt that some type of person can solve it easily

(lol Fermat)

>> No.1389765

... When in doubt, infinity. :)

>> No.1389766

LOLOLOL Fermat's Last Theorem

>> No.1389767
File: 175 KB, 499x484, almost laughing face.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389767

>>1389746
>Prove a multi-century old mathematical challenge.
>Homework.

>> No.1389769

i'm not a mathfag but isn't that one of the "big" problems that took some genius to prove?

>> No.1389771

>>1389730
Can I use complex numbers?

>> No.1389775

Shut up, guys... we might actually get someone to solve it if they don't know.

>> No.1389776

>>1389746
what a moron

>> No.1389783
File: 20 KB, 342x359, 1233354754138.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389783

true for a,b,c=0 by the way

>> No.1389786

>>1389783
not greater than 2, faggot XD

>> No.1389791

>>1389771
Nontrivial positive integers.

>> No.1389792

Infinity works, so there must be an infinite number of primes.

>> No.1389795

>>1389786
LULZ I TROL JOO SO FUNNI XD

(in case you're just an idiot: picture says "n" > 0, it says nothing about a,b,c)

>> No.1389796

I have proof for that, but I just don't have enough space on this box to write it.

>> No.1389798

(3987^12 + 4365^12)^(1/12) = 4472

source: http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=(3987^12+%2B+4365^12)^(1/12)

I can has prize now?

>> No.1389803

>>1389751


confirmed: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=(1782^12+%2B+1841^12)^(1/12)&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&a
mp;oq=&gs_rfai=

smart anon is smart

>> No.1389804

>>1389730
>>1389730

10^3 + 2^3 = 10.02659586^3

what's the problem???? Fermat was a moron.

>> No.1389805

>>1389769
Yes, it's Fermat's last theorem.

>> No.1389808
File: 53 KB, 544x444, 1273459596798.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389808

>teacher gives this as troll homework problem
>student comes back next day with solution
>solution checks out, fermats last theorem disproved
>my face

>> No.1389811

0^n+0^n=0^n

>> No.1389816

>>1389791
like this >>1389804

>> No.1389824

>>1389808
You know, that could happen. Too bad geniuses don't reproduce much.

>> No.1389825
File: 4 KB, 214x133, wolfram.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389825

>>1389751

>> No.1389826
File: 3 KB, 109x126, 1248937197321.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389826

>>1389816
because 10.02659586 is a "Nontrivial positive integers"

>10.02659586
>integer

>> No.1389838
File: 137 KB, 1440x870, hw.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389838

>>1389767
<-- Problem from Lang's introductory complex analysis textbook.

>> No.1389839

>>1389826
You are obviously not the 74% portion of OP's claim. Don't give up. Math is actually fun.

>> No.1389842

>>1389825

shoop.

>> No.1389845 [DELETED] 

SｔｏP FuｃｋINg_AＴＴＡＣKInG_ｗｗｗ.AnoLaＷlＴａLｋ.ＳＥ_rEＰlＡＣＥ lAWＬ wＩth ｎ
hvjjbhp nly npwckjdsx uzvhhpvmuvsa qf

>> No.1389852

>>1389842
Clearly.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=++++1782^12+%2B+1841^12+%3D+1922^12

>> No.1389855

>>1389842
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1782^12+%2B+1841^12+%3D+1922^12

>> No.1389862
File: 53 KB, 704x396, hmmmm_yeah.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389862

>>1389842
haha awesome, even if it is a shoop.

But in Serge Lang's "Algebra" there's an exercise "Proof that an arbitrary n-cycle and a transposition generate the <span class="math">S_n[/spoiler]". Now, that's simply wrong. There has to be a certain coprime relationship between the transposition and the n-cycle for this to work out. So dunno, perhaps it's not a shoop.

>> No.1389863

>>1389826
OP didn't say anything about that.

>> No.1389872

>>1389863
well someone (>>1389791) did

>> No.1389874

>>1389838
Yeah, we took that in kindergarten - how I miss the Soviet Union... We used to fight over who'd help solve blue sky catastrophe bifurcation problems, ah the chaos!

>> No.1389875

>>1389863
Yeah I did.
See >>1389791

>> No.1389877

>>1389862
whoops, I thought the shoop post was referring to the Lang exercise. In that case: HAHAHA (if it's real, I mean)

>> No.1389897

>>1389852
>>1389855

Yeh well done guys, you sure showed me!! I actually thought I had disproved Fermat's Last Theorem. I wasn't joking at all.

Man you guys are smart.

>> No.1389902
File: 62 KB, 294x400, serge_land..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389902

oh Serge, you crazay

>> No.1389915
File: 14 KB, 300x508, dr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389915

>>1389877
1921.9999999558672254029113283703
According to calc 64bits.

Moar!

>> No.1389926
File: 15 KB, 230x248, wiles-sm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389926

Piece of cake.

>> No.1389927

Infinitely many.

>> No.1389932

>>1389862
in the 3rd edition the problem (chpt 1, ex. 38d) assumes n is prime. dunno about earlier editions.

>>1389877
it's not. i first saw that in a physical copy of the book at the uni library.

>> No.1389937

>>1389798
>>1389803
Calculate them in wolfram independently and see that they are close, but a few decimals off

>> No.1389938

a = c, b = 0

>> No.1389939

1^4 + sqrt(2)^4 = 4th root of 5 to the power of 4

Gives us:

1 + 4 = 5

>> No.1389940
File: 15 KB, 354x264, homer_3d.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389940

>>1389897
>all the math i know i learned from the simpsons.

>> No.1389948

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=0%C2%B3+%2B+0%C2%B3+%3D+0%C2%B3

Doesnt say a,b,c can't be equal.

>> No.1389949
File: 66 KB, 706x458, titslol.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389949

Lang's Algebra, chpt 1, problem 56: A theorem of Tits.

>> No.1389956
File: 22 KB, 299x400, Fermat..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1389956

Hehe.

>> No.1389957

>>1389939
Again, nontrivial positive INTEGERS.

>> No.1389959

>>1389949
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tits_group

>> No.1389969

You guys are so dumb. I whipped a proof, check it out!

http://math.stanford.edu/~lekheng/flt/wiles.pdf

>> No.1389970

>>1389959
>doesn't notice the diagram

typical math nerd

>> No.1389974

Wow, acting smart on /sci/ !
I bet 10,000$ that you are unable to understand the proof provided by Mr. Andrew Wiles.

>> No.1389976

>>1389751
>1782^12 + 1841^12 = 1922^12
LOL no. They have to be exactly equal; "to 9 significant figures" doesn't count.

>> No.1389982

Hey guys,
I have a present for you.
http://math.stanford.edu/~lekheng/flt/wiles-small.pdf

>> No.1389983

>>1389969
>>1389974

I bet $10,000 neither of these two can even define the Hecke algebra (assuming they've ever heard of it) without looking it up on wikipedia.

>> No.1389984

>>1389970
what?
what do you mean i didn't notice the diagram? how could anyone not notice it?

i'm confused

>> No.1389991

>>1389959
>It has an outer automorphism obtained by sending (a,b) to (a,bbabababababbababababa).
>bbabababababbababababa

lol motorboting

>> No.1389992

>>1389957
Doesn't say that anywhere in OP's picture.

>> No.1389995

>>1389983
Your argument fails.

>> No.1389998

>>1389974
Ever read it?

>Collegefag trying to sound more advanced in math than the rest of us.

>> No.1390012

...shitstorm a brewin'.

>> No.1390024

>>1389992
Cause I forgot. Otherwise it'd be incredibly easy.

>>1389791
I wrote that.

Regardless I assumed people would be smart enough to realize it was Fermat's last theorem and not even try.

>> No.1390053

In this case one cannot figure out nothing.
Figuring shit out requires a rigorous proof. It took Mr. Wiles quite a while for that.

You can try a few numbers to get the idea, but that's only a good sense of mathematical intuition. I doubt you'll understand the complexity of the proof as it requires quite some loads of advanced math.

I admit: I do not understand the proof. This the equivalent of brain bodybuilding :))
Yeah, I did read a lot stuff about it and I am familiar with some concepts present in that proof. But I can't say: Oh, I figured this one out! That's quite fucking ridiculous to say.

>> No.1390081

Wait, isn't this Fermat's last?

>> No.1390088

>>1390053

how does it feel to know you will never, at any point in your life, be able to understand Wiles' proof?

>> No.1390093

>>1390081

No, any high schooler could solve this in under 5 minutes.

>> No.1390109

>>1390088
Feels good man. Props to the people who get it and to people who will.

>> No.1390118

Clearly...

<span class="math">a^n + b^n = c^n[/spoiler]
<span class="math">(a^2 + b^2)^{n-2} = (c^2)^{n-2}[/spoiler]
<span class="math">a^2 + b^2 = c^2[/spoiler]

So the Pythagorean theorem applies for any n>2.

>> No.1390120

RELATED: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVXB5zuZRcM

>> No.1390157

>>1390088

not that poster but:

pretty good, because algebraic geometry is interesting and all but not what i'm interested in

>> No.1390160

>>1390118
Wrong.
I don't know why mathematically, but I do know that if it were that simple it would not have taken 358 years for people to prove this.

>> No.1390165

>>1390118
i lol'd.

>>1390160 gtfo

>> No.1390166

>>1390118
did you just fucking factor a exponent and break the rules of math?

>> No.1390168

Hurr. Fermat's Last Theorem.

>> No.1390173

>>1390118
<span class="math">{(c^2)}^{n-2}=c^{2n-4}\ne c^n[/spoiler] except for n=4.
<span class="math">{(a^2+b^2)}^{n-2}=\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n-2}{{n-2}\choose i}a^{2i}b^{2(n-2-i)}\ne a^2+b^2[/spoiler] except for a=0 or b=0.

Congrats, you just proved that one can use the Pythagorean theorem to prove that there exists b and c such that <span class="math">0^4+b^4=c^4[/spoiler]!

>> No.1390178

>>1390166
Space is curved. Therefore math is curved.

>> No.1390184

>>1390178
Women are curved. Therefore their morals are curved.

>> No.1390193

>>1390184
Women are more complex than math.

>> No.1390196

>>1390193
Give me a proof.

>> No.1390197

>>1390193
Then why aren't women good at it?

>> No.1390201

>>1390160
People didn't care?

>> No.1390206 [DELETED] 

>>1389726
ＳＴoｐ_ｆｕCkＩＮｇ_AｔｔＡCＫＩNｇ wＷｗ.aＮｏｌＡWＬＴＡＬｋ.Sｅ_rｅpｌaＣE lAｗl ＷiｔH_n
dpb o yteflfr vua e usny lpi t m p d yjer

>> No.1390207

>>1390196
That, my friend, is an axiom.

>> No.1390225

>>1390207
So you can't prove it.

>> No.1390237

>>1390225
I'm not the person that you're replying to.
But I hate you.

>> No.1390238

>>1390225
Do you know what an axiom is?

>> No.1390241

>>1390088
If I can't understand the proof, it's simply because it isn't expressed in terms I understand.
If someone really understand the proof, it should be simple to explain what tools/theorems he used, what got in the way and how he was able to achieve an actual proof.
Don't really need to understand each tool, that's what school is for. Just knowing the challenges, the creativity behind it would be interesting.

>> No.1390245

>>1390238
I have one in my shed. It's used to make a point.

>> No.1390247

>>1390241
Watch that documentary. The man himself presents a sketch of his proof.

>> No.1390252

>>1390241

It's not that simple.

>> No.1390259

>>1390245
I must say: You are an amazing person!

>> No.1390280

>>1390247
Or just look at the actual proof.

http://math.stanford.edu/~lekheng/flt/wiles.pdf

(May take like 10-20 seconds to load, it's 109 pages long).

>> No.1390298

>>1390280
Yeah, if you want to admire the typeface. Look all day my friend! I say: look for 10 years.

>> No.1390472

>>1390247
That Nova one with John Conway in it? That was effing laughable, math-wise.

Step 1) An elliptic curve is a doughnut
Step 2) A modular form is this funny grid thing in hyperbolic space
Step 3) Every elliptic curve is a modular form in disguise
step 4) THEREFORE FLT IS TROO

Wiles: "So i did the calculations, and they weren't coming out, so then I did some more calculations and then....I'm sorry....BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW"

>> No.1391246

>>1390120
I liked this, thank you.

>> No.1391338

If n > 2, then it's -not- 0

>> No.1391384

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=log_100((y^100)%2B(z^100))%3D100

>> No.1391409

a=1, b=1, c=1

Faggots, all of you

>> No.1391507

>>1391409

DING DING DING

WINRAR

AND IT WAS ALL SO SIMPLE.

>> No.1391597

>>1391409
1^n=1
1^n+1^n=1^n
1+1=1
1=1
AWESOME

>> No.1391630

What the fuck are we supposed to do? Find n? find a, b and c? What restrictions are there, are we supposed to be working in integers?

>> No.1391646

>105 posts
Back to /g/

>> No.1391653

I thought a b and c had to be consecutive.

>> No.1391783

>>1389746 and I'm pretty sure we can also separate the people who are willing to help you on your homework and the people who are smart enough to see this is a homework thread

LOL SELFPWNAGE!!!

>> No.1391800

>>1390166
>>1390160
Got trolled, niggas.

>> No.1391801

>>1389751
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1782^12+%2B+1841^12+%3D+1922^12

>> No.1391809

the awnser is fucking 0

>> No.1391810

a, b, and c are 0

>> No.1391950

>>1389956
hehehehe
Clearly 74% of high school students figure any answer is better than no answer. Unless a,b, or c is allowed to be 0. Then there's no point in asking. Fermat's a cool guy.

>> No.1391972

>>1390196
With women no can mean yes. Math no always means no. Modern yes/no binary logic can not be applied! Complex logical systems must be at work!

>> No.1392650

>>1391972
Godel would like a word with you.

>> No.1392667

>>1389730

No solution.

>> No.1392685

n=1
a = any non zero real number
b = any non zero real number
c = a+b

fucking faggots.

>> No.1392691

74%?? Its not an american high school for sure

>> No.1392696

(-2)^3 + 2^3 = 0^3