Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Yarosh
The state unitary enterprise All-russian research institute
For optical and physical measurements (sue VNIIOFI)
RUSSIA,119361, Moscow,Ozernaya,46.
vs.yarosh@mtu-net.ru
a0 = v 2 u 2
b0 = 2 v u
c0 = v 2 + u2
as endless series a primitive solutions for Pythagorean equations:
ao2 + bo2 = c o2
and as endless series irrational roots:
n
a = n (a o + a o b o
n 2
+ ao co
n 2
)/3 =
= n [( v 2 u 2 ) n + ( v 2 u 2 ) ( 2 v u ) n 2 + ( v 2 + u 2 ) 2 ( v 2 + u 2 ) n 2 ] / 3
n
b = n ( b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
n 2
)/3 =
= n [( 2v u ) 2 ( v 2 u 2 ) n 2 + ( 2 v u ) n + ( 2 v u ) 2 ( v 2 + u 2 ) n 2 ] / 3
2
c = n (c o ao
n 2
+ co bo
n 2
+ co ) / 3 =
= n [( v 2 + u 2 ) 2 ( v 2 u 2 ) n 2 + ( v 2 + u 2 ) 2 ( 2 v u ) n 2 + ( v 2 + u 2 ) n ] / 3
for Fermats equations :
n
a + b = c
1. A five forms
1
A1 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A2 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A3 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A4 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A 5 = c0
2. A non-modular elliptical curves.
For this curves is special variant Freys-Yaroshs equations:
Y 2 = ( X A ) X ( X + B) =
2
= ao b o c o
Yn = ( X A ) X ( X + B ) =
n
= ao bo c o
where
X = bo
B = ao
or X = b o
or
B = ao
= ao + bo = c o = (v 2 + u 2 ) 2
4. A two zeta functions:
Riemanns zeta function
S
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
( 1 S ) (1 S) 0
2
and autors zeta function:
QS
(S) = (1) = 2s sin
n
a key to finally proofs a conjectures:
of Riemanns, of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyers
5. A statement:
Hypothesis of Shimura-Taniyama
All elliptic curves are modular curve,[1],
is erroneous hypothesis . According, reasoning
by doctor A.Wiles, [2] , is faulty reasoning.
As alternative and as confirmatory evidence this fact,
autor to make an offer application Abel group and
Diophantine equations as
universal mathematical formulation for proofs
2
Instead of Introduction
Part 1, Yuri Zhivotov , see [5],
against argumentations
by Ken Ribet and Andrew Wiles .
A u t o rs P r o p o s a l s
Part 2 , History
Part 3 , Possible variants proof
of Fermats Last Theorem
over Q and applications Abel group.
Alternative Wiles proof
Part 4, Non-modular elliptic curves,
10-th problem of D.Hilbert,
as way to proof of Riemann Hypothesis
Part 5 , Intercommunication
between the elliptical curves,
Abel group and the non-modular forms.
Part 6, Riemanns sphere as mapping
of space task common solutions of Conjecture
Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer and
Riemann Hypothesis
Part 7 , Proof Riemanns Hypotesis
Part 8 ,C o m m e n t a r y
to the question of Dyophantines equations
and their irrational roots ,containing
information of non-modular elliptical curves.
Part 9, Proof of Conjecture Beal
Reference
Instead of Introduction
SYSTEMS A COORDINATS
AND GENERAL INVARIANT
System A coordinats
for whole primitive Pythagoras numbers
Pic.1
This is ortogonal system coordinate for primitive
Pythagorean triads:
a0 = v2 u2
b 0 = 2 vu
c0 = v 2 + u 2
as for all pair v>u numbers are the numbers
of various evenness taken from endless series , see (3) :
u = 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 ,4 , ,....
v = (u + 1) = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ,...
Consequence1
bo
= co v 2
2v
b
v = ao + u 2 = o = co u 2
2u
u = v 2 ao =
(4)
System B coordinates
for my complex numbers
Pic. 2
Pic.3
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0 = 2
(5)
[ s, s ]
(6)
S = s, s = s s sin Q
(7)
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
S
( 1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
(8)
Here :
Flatness ( , ) for complex numbers z = + i and z' = i ;
Point P = P (a o , b o ) ; Point P' = P' ( , , Y ) ;
Axis absciss for ; Axis ordinat for ;
It is stereographycal projection flatness ( , )
to sphere ( , , Y )
Pic. 4
6
ao
1 + a0 + bo
bo
1 + ao + bo
2
y=
ao + bo
1 + ao + bo
a0
1 + c0
bo
1 + co
co
1 + co
Pic.5
INITIAL DATA
V A R I A N T D A T A 1
If angle Q = , see Pic.2 and Pic.3, then:
+ ib o +
ib o
Re (s ) = 0
(9)
Re (s ) = 0
According we have endless series numbers:
S = s s = a o + ib o a o ib o =
= o
(10)
o =
S = (v2 + u2 )
(11)
S = s, s = s s sin 0 = 0
(12)
S
( 1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
Here scalars S = 0 are arguments for theyre functions
.
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
(13)
Pic. 6
The axis of absciss
a system coordinat.
Common the angle Q is general argument for general functions:
S
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
( 1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
(14)
VA R I A N T D A T A 2
If angle Q = 0 , see Pic. 3, then:
+ ib o = 0
ib o = 0
Re (s ) = a o
(15)
Re ( s ) = a o
According we have endless series numbers:
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
= a0
(16)
ao = S = ( v 2 u 2 )
(17)
S = [ s, s ] = s s sin 0 = 0
(18)
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
S
( 1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
(19)
+ i b0
ib o
Pic. 7
a11 a12
a 21 a 22
Statement 3
Hypothesis of Shymura-Taniyama
All elliptic curves are modular curve,[1]
is sufficiently
Statement 4
A.Wiles proved:
Hypothesis of Shymura-Taniyama
equitable for a Frey elliptic curve.
Statement 5
If Fermats Last Theorem is proved for n=4, there is no need
of prove it for all even exponents of degree for Fermat equation
Autors [3] and [4] it is claimed that :
Suffice it to prove for n=4 and for n=p .
Here p arbitrary value of prime numbers.
10
Det M ( 3 3) = 0
Equivalent matrix M ( 3 3) :
2
n 2
a11 = ao n
a12 = a o b o
2
n 2
n
a 22 = b o
M ( 3 3) = a 21 = b o ao
2
n 2
2
n2
a 32 = c o b o
a 31 = c o a o
2
n 2
a 23 = b o c o
n
a 33 = c o
a13 = a o c o
n 2
11
a0 = v 2 u 2
b0 = 2 v u
c0 = v 2 + u2
as endless series a primitive solutions for Pythagorean equations:
ao2 + bo2 = c o2
and as endless series irrational roots:
n
a = n (a o + a o b o
n 2
+ ao c o
n 2
)/3 =
= n [( v 2 u 2 ) n + ( v 2 u 2 ) ( 2 v u ) n 2 + ( v 2 + u 2 ) 2 ( v 2 + u 2 ) n 2 ] / 3
2
b = n ( b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
n 2
)/3 =
= n [( 2v u ) 2 ( v 2 u 2 ) n 2 + ( 2 v u ) n + ( 2 v u ) 2 ( v 2 + u 2 ) n 2 ] / 3
2
c = n (c o a o
n 2
+ co bo
n2
+ co ) / 3 =
= n [( v 2 + u 2 ) 2 ( v 2 u 2 ) n 2 + ( v 2 + u 2 ) 2 ( 2 v u ) n 2 + ( v 2 + u 2 ) n ] / 3
for Fermats equations :
n
a + b = c
A1 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A2 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A3 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A4 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A 5 = c 0
2. A non-modular elliptical curves.
For this curves is special variant Freys-Yaroshs equations:
Y 2 = ( X A ) X ( X + B) =
2
= ao b o c o
Yn = ( X A ) X ( X + B ) =
n
= ao bo c o
where
12
X = bo
B = ao
or X = b o
or
B = ao
s = ao + i bo
s = a o i b o
S = s s = (a o + i b o ) ( a o i b o ) =
2
= ao + bo = c o = (v 2 + u 2 ) 2
4. A two zeta functions:
Riemanns zeta function
S
( 1 S ) (1 S) 0
2
and autors zeta function:
QS
(S) = (1) = 2s sin
n
a key to finally proofs a conjectures:
of Riemanns, of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyers
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
5. A statement:
Hypothesis of Shimura-Taniyama
All elliptic curves are modular curve,[1],
is erroneous hypothesis . According, reasoning
by doctor A.Wiles, [2] , is faulty reasoning.
As alternative and as confirmatory evidence this fact,
autor to make an offer application Abel group and
Diophantine equations as
universal mathematical formulation for proofs
Fermats Last Theorem and Conjectures:
Riemanns, Beals, Birchs and Swinnerton-Dyers.
Here pair natural numbers
v>u
v>u
13
Counterstatement 2
A Frey elliptic curve :
Y = ( X A ) X ( X + B)
2
Counterstatement 4
A.Wiles proved:
Hypothesis of Shymura-Taniyama
equitable for a Frey elliptic curve
as semistable modular elliptic curves.
It is sufficiently. But there is just one snag (to it):
Exist my non-modular elliptic curve.
For this curve is special variant Freys-Yarosh equations:
Y 2 = ( X A ) X ( X + B) =
2
= ao b o c o
Yn = ( X A ) X ( X + B ) =
n
= ao bo c o
where
X = bo
B = ao
or X = b o
or
B = ao
and
n
n
A = ( b o a o ) or A = ( b o a o )
conductor-controller.
2
ap = p + 1 p
p 1 for p 1 (mod 4 )
Np =
p + 1 for p 1 (mod 4)
14
A1 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A2 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A3 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A4 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A 5 = c 0
Here every number from endless series prime numbers
2
A1 = ( b0 a0 )
if b o > a o
will not divide into
16 = 4 ( b0 = 2vu) =
4 ( b0 = 2 2 1) =
2
= ( 22 ) 2 = ( 2 ) 2
If number
16 =
(ao bo c o )4n
2
(ao b o c o ) 2n
=
28
2
27 = 9 ( a 0 = v 2 u 2 ) =
= 9 ( a o = 2 2 12 ) =
= 33
if odd number 27 is equivalent:
+ 4a o 3
27 =
2
bo
where
3
= ( 4 a o + 27 b o )
discriminant for canonical form any elliptic curves:
Y 2 = x 3 + ao x + bo
15
A 1 = ( b 0 a 0 ) if b 0 > a 0
is endless series of conductors-criterions
for separation non- modular elliptic curves.
Number 2 end number 3 were invariants
from endless series prime numbers.
All prime numbers settle down in a natural line in pairs,
intervals between which submit to
a rhythm of numbers v=2 and a 0 = 3 :
21 = 1
32 =1
19 17 = 2
51 47 = 2 2
23 19 = 2 2
53 51 = 2
53 = 2
75= 2
31 23 = 2 3
57 53 = 2 2
37 31 = 2 3
61 57 = 2 2
63 61 = 2
11 7 = 2 2
13 11 = 2
41 37 = 2 2
17 13 = 2 2
47 43 = 2 2
43 41 = 2
71 63 = 2 2
73 71 = 2
79 73 = 2 3
103 101 = 2
83 79 = 2 2
107 103 = 2 2
87 83 = 2 2
89 87 = 2
109 107 = 2
111 109 = 2
113 111 = 2
93 89 = 2 2
117 113 = 2 2
97 93 = 2 2
101 97 = 2
121 117 = 2 2
.......... .......... ..
2 = ( 20 + 2 1 + 2 2 + 2 3 + ... + 2 + ... + 2 ) 2
Following spectral forms contains this invariant:
( A i A i 1 ) = 2
or
( A i A i 1 ) = 2
( A i A i 1 ) = 2 2
( A i A i 1 ) = 3 2
( A i A i 1 ) = 4 2
16
Note:
and A
D n = (a 0
n 2
+ b0
n 2
+ c0
n 2
)/3 =
50
3
D n = (a 0
n2
+ b0
n2
+ c0
n2
)/3 =
20 450
3
a0 = v 2 u 2 = 3
b0 = 2 v u = 4
c0 = v 2 + u2 = 5
and basis
v=2
u=1
Statement:
If equation:
a4 + b4 = c 4
4
have roots:
a = 3.996355...
b = 4.041031...
c = 4.511801...
then roots:
17
a = 3.9671335...
b = 4.2629624...
c = 4.507634...
for equation
a8 + b8 = c8
is independent roots .
Because:
[( 4 a ) 2 = ( 3.996355...) 2 ] [ 8 a = 3.9671335...]
[( 4 b ) 2 = ( 4.041031...) 2 ] [ 8 b = 4.2629624...]
[( 4 c ) 2 = ( 4.511801...) 2 ] [ 8 c = 4.507634...]
a + b = c
a = n a 0 4 D n = 4 9
2
50 4 150
=
= 3.499635512 ...
3
3
b = n b 0 4 D n = 4 16
2
c = n c 0 4 D n = 4 25
50 4 800
=
= 4.041031009 ...
3
3
50 4 1250
=
= 4.518010018 ...
3
3
20450 8 184050
=
= 3.96713355 ...
3
3
20450 8 327200
2
8
b = 8 b 0 8 D n = 8 16
=
= 4.262962429...
3
3
20450 8 511250
2
8
c = 8 c 0 8 D n = 8 25
=
= 4.507533969 ...
3
3
8
a = 8 a 0 8 D n = 8 9
18
GENERAL RESULT:
[( 4 a ) 2 = ( 3.499635512...) 2 ] [ 8 a = 3.96713355...]
[( 4 b ) 2 = (4.041031009...) 2 ] [ 8 b = 4.262962429...]
[( 4 c ) 2 = ( 4.518010018...) 2 ] [ 8 c = 4.507533969...]
COMMENT
Two the way work out a problem of P.Fermat:
1. Deductive (intuitive) way
2. Inductive way
1. Deductive way
Let
x 8 + y 8 = z 8 equation of P. Fermat
A priori it is known:
x = 3.967133355...
y = 4.262962429...
z = 4,507533969...
Issue:
How did I do it ?
Answer:
Enigma
3. Inductive way
Let
xn = A , yn = B , z = C
Then:
x=n A
y=n B
z=n c
roots for equation of P.Fermat:
xn + yn = zn
If
A+B=C
where vectors
19
A = ao D n = ao ( ao
n 2
+ bo
B = b o D b = b o ( a n 2 + b o
C = c o D N = c o (ao
n 2
n 2
n 2
+ bo
n 2
+ co
+ co
n 2
n 2
+ co
n 2
a0 = v 2 u 2
b0 = 2 v u
c0 = v2 + u2
4. Basis for Inductive way is Abelian group of three whole numbers:
2
squares a o a or vectors A a
2
squares b o b or vectors B b
2
squares c o c or vectors C c
Abelian group of whole numbers a,b,c (from Internet)
I chose to begin with the notes out of which I constructed the central definition below. The
equation which defines distributivity is:
a(b+c) = ab + ac
This has, of course, a `reversed' form, (b+c)a = ba+ca: I chose to name the displayed form
`left' distributive and this latter form `right' distributive. When cast in the general terms of
binary operators, naming multiplication f and addition g, we have, for any legitimate a, b
and c:
f(a, g(b,c)) = g(f(a,b), f(a,c))
Thus, if we take (AB|f:C) and (DE|g:F) as temporary namings for the domains and
ranges of our binary operators, we obtain
a is in A;
g(b,c) (in F), b and c are in B;
f(a,b) (in C) and b are in D; and
f(a,c) (in C) and c are in E.
20
Distributivity
A binary operator, (AB|f:B), left-distributes over a uniform binary operator, g, on B
precisely if, for every a in A and b, c in B: f(a,g(b,c)) = g(f(a,b),f(a,c)). We say (BA|f:B)
right-distributes over (BB|g:B) precisely if, for every a in A and b, c in B: f(g(b,c),a) =
g(f(b,a),f(c,a)). One binary operator is said to distribute over another precisely if the former
both left-distributes and right-distributes over the latter - in which case both are necessarily
uniform and the two are parallel (that is, they act on the same space).
In particular, any Abelian binary operator which left- or right-distributes over some binary
operator inevitably distributes over the latter. When B and A are distinct, (AB|f:B) can
only distribute from the left over anything, and that must be over some (BB|:B), so there is
no ambiguity in refering to such an f as distributing over some g, implicitly uniform on B. It
should also be noted that if f does left-distribute over some g, then its transpose, (BA| (b,a)>f(a,b) :B), right-distributes over g.
Further reading
An (AB|:B) may left-distribute over a (BB|:B): compare and contrast with an (AA|:|)
left-associating over an (AB|:B). The combination of these forms the cornerstone of the
notion of linearity, which underlies such fundamental tools as scalars and vectors.
PART 1
will be possible to understand how the Great Fermat's theorem was proved. Let us believe
that none of the mathematicians, except Frey, made errors (Singh informs on his errors). If
any suspicions arise that additional errors exist, we will substantiate them.
The main mistake of Andrew Wiles it the fact that he got involved with the proof of
Great Fermat's theorem. All the more, the mathematicians should not have made a mistake
collectively.
Let us trace the way from Taniyama-Shimura's hypothesis
to Fermat's theorem, of course, if we manage it.
Taniyama-Shimura's hypothesis states that any elliptical curve is modular.
In particular, the elliptical curve described by the equation:
Y 2 = X ( X K ) ( X + D)
(1)
with the integer coefficients must be modular.
Andrew Wiles proved Taniyama-Shimura's hypothesis.
That is he proved that the elliptical curve described by the equation:
Y 2 = X ( X K ) ( X + D)
(1)
with the integer coefficients was modular. That is
the following equations correspond to modular curves:
Y 2 = X ( X 3) ( X + 5 )
(2)
Y 2 = X ( X 9) ( X + 25)
(3)
Y 2 = X ( X 27 ) (125)
(4)
Y 2 = X ( X 81) ( X + 625)
(5)
Y 2 = X ( X 243) ( X + 3125)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
was not modular. Ken Ribet contradicts to Andrew Wiles. This is a deadlock.
Perhaps, somebody wants to say that the numbers A n and B n do not exist?
Perhaps, somebody wants to say that the numbers A n and B n
are included into the hypothetical Fermat's equation
(10)
A n + B n = Cn
22
d = (a b c ) 2n / 28
(11)
Pay attention. If number "c" does not exist, the discriminant does not exist.
If the discriminant does not exist, the Frey's curve does not exist.
If the Frey's curve does not exist, the curve is fictitious.
Just another time Ribet tries to divert a reader's attention
from the real existence of Frey's curve.
Let us remind a reader that the discriminant of elliptic curve has the form:
D = 16 [a n b n ( a n + b n )]2
(12)
d = [a n b n ( a n + b n )]2 / 2 8
(13)
or
d = [a b n ( C)]2 / 2 8
n
(14)
Such record of the minimal discriminant excludes the doubt about existence of Frey's
curve, which is semistable and modular. Such record of the minimal discriminant reduces
the idea of Fermat's theorem proof to the consideration of possibility of minimal
discriminant factoring, that is number c presentation in the form of exponential number c n .
In this case the Ribet's exercises with putting the Fermat's numbers
into the Frey's elliptic curve equation are not needed.
However, as it follows from the article, Ribet made every effort to conceal this
simple truth and to substitute it with the reasonings about the link
between Frey's curve and Fermat's equation.
Let us consider the reasons, for which Ribet forcedly conceals the truth.
23
Conclusions
Ribet did not prove Fermat's theorem in the assumption of the truth
of Taniyama-Shimura hypothesis.
Ribet made too many mistakes and discrepancies, which allows
to consider his proof as an unsuccessful attempt.
The existence of Bill's conjecture also strikes a blow at Ribet's proof,
which obviously is impossible to ward off.
Let me express perplexity to Andrew Wiles, which is connected with
the use of Ribet's work in the "general" proof of Fermat's theorem,
to which Wiles has pretensions. So many mistakes were revealed in several lines
of the proof that it is hard to believe that they had not
been noticed by the specialist in this field of mathematics.
The Great Fermat's theorem is connected with
the history of mathematics,
and it is impermissible to treat it haughtily.
A u t o rs P r o p o s a l s
Autor of these article proposes to write the minimal discriminant
of Frey's-Yaroshs non-modular elliptic curve:
Y 2 = ( X A ) X ( X + B) =
2
= ao b o c o
where
2
X = bo
2
B = ao
And
2
2
A = (bo ao )
in the following form:
(a o b o c o ) 2n
=
28
[( v 2 u 2 ) ( 2 v u ) ( v 2 + u 2 ]2 n
=
28
[( 2 v u ) ( v 4 u 4 )]2 n
=
0
28
(15)
(16)
(17)
min =
(18)
24
n 2
n 2
A n = ao + ao b o
B n = bo ao
Cn = c o ao
n 2
+ ao c o
n 2
n 2
+ bo + bo c o
2
+ c o bo
n 2
+ co
(19)
a 0 b o c o = (a o b o ) c o
bo c o ao = (bo c o ) ao
(20)
c o a o b o = (c o a o ) b o
Left distributive
ao (b o + c o ) = ao bo + ao c o
(21)
Right distributive
( b o + c o ) a o = b o a o + c o a o
(22)
n 2
n 2
A n = ao + ao bo
B n = bo ao
C = c o ao
n
n 2
n 2
n 2
+ ao c o
+ bo + bo co
2
+ c o bo
n 2
+ co
(23)
n
(ao ) n = a o
(bo )n = bo
1 n
(c o ) = c o
0
(24)
ao = bo = c o = E = 1
n
ao ao = ao
n+m
bo bo = bo
n
co co = co
(a o
nm
+ bo
nm
+ co
n+m
n+m
nm
(25)
) = 3 Dn
(26)
(27)
where
25
D n = (ao
n m
+ bo
n m
+ co
n m
)/3
(28)
Consequence
Linear combination
n
a = n A = A = n (a o + a o b o
n2
+ ao c o
n 2
b = n B = B = n ( b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
c = n C = C = n ( c o a o
n 2
+ co bo
n 2
n 2
)/3
)/3
(29)
+ co ) / 3
A + B = C
(30)
a0 = v 2 u 2
b0 = 2 v u
(31)
c0 = v 2 + u2
primitive Pythagorean triplets
I did consider all cases
that appear at the "introduction" of the numbers
n
A , B and C
(32)
A + B = C
(33)
Y 2 = ( X A ) X ( X + B) =
n
= ao bo c o
(34
if vectors
26
n 2
n 2
An
n 2
Bn
n 2
+ bo + bo c o
n 2
+ co bo
A = ao + ao bo
B = b o a o
C = c o a o
+ ao c o
n 2
(35)
+ c o Cn
a n = A (a o b o
n
n 2
bo = B (bo ao
2
c o = C ( c o a o
+ ao c o
n 2
n2
n 2
+ bo co
2
+ co bo
n 2
n2
(36)
In this case
linear combination generate three multitude irrational numbers
n
a = n A = A = n ( a o + a o b o
n2
+ ao c o
b = n B = B = n ( b o a n2 + b o + b o c o
n
c = n C = C = n ( c o a o
n 2
+ c o bo
n 2
n 2
n2
)/3
)/3
(37)
+ co ) / 3
A + B = C
(38)
Pay attention.
If whole primitive Pythagorean numbers
a0 = v 2 u 2
(39)
b0 = 2 v u
c0 = v 2 + u2
does exist, then the discriminant
(a o b o c o ) 2n
=
=
28
[( v 2 u 2 ) ( 2 v u ) ( v 2 + u 2 ]2 n
=
28
[( 2 v u ) ( v 4 u 4 )]2 n
=
0
28
min
(40)
27
DEDUCING
Hypothesis of Shimura-Taniyama
All elliptic curves are modular curve,[2],
is erroneous hypothesis . According, case- based reasoning
by doctor A.Wiles, [3] , is erroneous either.
PART 2
History
In mathematics, the modularity theorem establishes an important connection, between
elliptic curves over the field of rational numbers and modular forms, certain analytic
functions introduced in 19th century mathematics. It was proved, for all elliptic curves over
the rationals whose conductor (see definition below) was not a multiple of 27, in
fundamental work of Andrew Wiles and Richard Taylor. The result had previously been
called the TaniyamaShimuraWeil conjecture, or related names. The great interest in the
theorem was that it was already known to imply Fermat's Last Theorem, a celebrated
unsolved problem on diophantine equations.
The remaining cases of the modularity theorem (of elliptic curve not with semistable
reduction) were subsequently settled by Christophe Breuil, Brian Conrad, Fred Diamond,
and Richard Taylor .
An incorrect version of this theorem was first conjectured by Yutaka Taniyama in
September 1955. With Goro Shimura he improved its rigor until 1957. Taniyama died in
1958. The conjecture was rediscovered by Andr Weil in 1967, who showed that it would
follow from the (conjectured) functional equations for some twisted L-series of the elliptic
curve; this was the first serious evidence that the conjecture might be true. In the 1970s it
became associated with the Langlands program of unifying conjectures in mathematics.
It attracted considerable interest in the 1980s when Gerhard Frey suggested that the
TaniyamaShimuraWeil conjecture implies Fermat's last theorem. He did this by
attempting to show that any counterexample to Fermat's last theorem would give rise to a
non-modular elliptic curve. Ken Ribet later proved this result. In 1995, Andrew Wiles, with
the partial help of Richard Taylor, proved the modularity theorem for semistable elliptic
curves, which was strong enough to yield a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem.
The full modularity theorem was finally proved in 1999 by Breuil, Conrad, Diamond, and
Taylor who, building on Wiles' work, incrementally chipped away at the remaining cases
until the full result was proved.
Several theorems in number theory similar to Fermat's last theorem follow from the
modularity theorem. For example: no cube can be written as a sum of two coprime n-th
powers, n 3. (The case n = 3 was already known by Euler.)
28
References
29
PART 3
Alternative statement
I offer to you attention a solution Fermats problem
as solution of system of equations P. Fermat.
The are enough reasons to assume that P. Fermat
considered the equation:
an + b n = c n
(41)
30
a2 + b2 = c2
a3 + b3 = c3
a4 + b4 = c4
.................
.................
a +b = c
..................
..................
n
(42)
a2 + b2 = c 2
(43)
a0 = v 2 u 2
b0 = 2 v u
c0 = v + u
2
(44)
31
( ao , b0 , c 0 , n )
are
a = n a 0 D n
(45)
b = n b 0 D n
(46)
c = n c 0 D n
(47)
Here
D n = ( a0
n 2
+ b0
n 2
+ c0
n 2
)/3
(48)
x2 + y2 = z2
(49)
a0 = v 2 u 2
b0 = 2 v u
c0 = v + u
2
(50)
ao2 + bo2 = c o2
(51)
NOTE
Pair natural numbers
v>u
32
Diagram 1
21 = 1
19 17 = 2
51 47 = 2 2
32 =1
23 19 = 2 2
53 51 = 2
53 = 2
31 23 = 2 3
57 53 = 2 2
75= 2
37 31 = 2 3
11 7 = 2 2
13 11 = 2
41 37 = 2 2
61 57 = 2 2
63 61 = 2
17 13 = 2 2
47 43 = 2 2
43 41 = 2
79 73 = 2 3
103 101 = 2
83 79 = 2 2
107 103 = 2 2
87 83 = 2 2
89 87 = 2
109 107 = 2
111 109 = 2
93 89 = 2
113 111 = 2
97 93 = 2
117 113 = 2 2
101 97 = 2
71 63 = 2 2
73 71 = 2
(52)
121 117 = 2 2
.......... .......... ..
Et cetera, et cetera
33
General conclusion
See formerly :
square a o a or vector A a
2
square b o b or vector B b
2
square c o c or vector C c
General basis for all rightly solutions to problems of Last theorem, Riemanns conjecture,
Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture is Abel Group
G, f
Consequence 1
If v > u are the numbers of various evenness
taken from endless series of natural numbers , vide supra, then :
n
n 2
n 2
A = ao + ao b o
B = b o ao
C = c o a o
n 2
+ ao c o
n2
n 2
+ bo + bo c o
2
+ co bo
n 2
+ co
(53)
n
a 0 b o c o = (a o b o ) c o
bo c o ao = (bo c o ) ao
(54)
c o a o b o = (c o a o ) b o
Left -distributive
ao (b o + c o ) = ao bo + ao c o
(55)
34
Right- distributive
( b o + c o ) a o = b o a o + c o a o
(56)
n 2
n 2
A = ao + ao b o
B = b o ao
C = c o a o
n 2
+ ao c o
n2
n 2
+ bo + bo c o
2
+ co bo
n 2
+ co
(57)
n
(ao ) n = a o
(bo )n = bo
1 n
(c o ) = c o
0
(58)
ao = bo = c o = E = 1
n
ao ao = ao
n+m
bo bo = bo
n
co co = co
(59)
n+m
(60)
n+m
Pay attention.
Everywhere
(ao
nm
+ bo
nm
+ co
nm
) = 3 Dn
(61)
where
D n = (ao
nm
+ bo
nm
+ co
nm
)/3
(62)
35
Consequence 2
Linear combination
a = n A = A = n (a o + a o b o
n 2
+ ao c o
b = n B = B = n ( b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
n
c = n C = C = n ( c o a o
n 2
+ c o bo
n 2
n 2
n 2
)/3
)/3
(63)
+ co ) / 3
A n + B n = Cn
(64)
PART 4
an + bn = c n
(65)
Y 2 X (X pq ) (X + bq )
(mod p )
(66)
deterministic expression
2
Y = ( X A ) X ( X + B)
(67)
36
( X A ) = a0
X = bo
(68)
( X + B ) = c 0
where
2
A = b o ao
B = a o
(69)
and
a0 = ( v 2 u 2 )
b 0 = ( 2vu )
(70)
c0 = ( v 2 + u2 )
primitive Pythagorean triplets for all
v>u
(71)
A 1 = ( b0 a0 )
if b o > a o
(72)
16 = 4 ( b0 = 2vu) =
4 ( b0 = 2 2 1) =
(73)
2 2
= ( 2 ) = ( 2 )
2 2
if number
16 =
(ao bo c o )4n
2
(74)
(ao bo c o ) 2n
=
28
(75)
27 = 9 ( a 0 = v 2 u 2 ) =
= 9 ( a o = 2 2 12 ) =
=3
(76)
37
+ 4a o 3
27 =
2
bo
(77)
where
3
= ( 4 a o + 27 b o )
(78)
Y 2 = x 3 + ao x + bo
(79)
A 1 = ( b 0 a 0 ) if b 0 > a 0
(80)
Y = ao bo c o
and for
n
(81)
n>2
Y = ao bo c o
(82)
In this case:
( X A ) = a0
X = bo
(83)
( X + B ) = c 0
where
n
A = bo ao
B = a o
(84)
and
a0 = ( v 2 u 2 )
b 0 = ( 2vu )
(85)
c0 = ( v + u )
2
v>u
(86)
A = ( b 0 a0 )
(87)
16 = 4 ( b0 = 2vu) =
4 ( b0 = 2 2 1) =
(88)
2 2
= ( 2 ) = ( 2 )
2 2
27 = 9 3 = 3 3
(89)
In the end, if
ao = 3
bo = 4
co = 5
then we have a minimal discriminant for
(90)
n = 2:
(ao b o c o ) 2n
=
28
( 3 4 5) 4
=
= 50 625
28
(91)
(92)
where
As explanatory, for n = 15 :
(ao bo c o ) 2n
=
=
28
( 3 4 5) 30
=
= 2.210 739 2 10 53
8
2
(93)
Consequently, my curve
is non-singular, my curve is elliptical curve.
2. Instead of Freys formula:
ap = p + 1 v p
(94)
P.Fermats and G.Freys equations. General result three Rules: Rule A, Rule B and
Rule for separate and calculate endless series prime-numbers. It is adequate
interpretation conclusion of Matiyasevich, who has proved 10-th problem of D.Hilbert,
proves to be true:
All prime numbers are simple search (recalculation)
of all of some natural numbers.
Three forms of Rules, in according to conception by D.Hilbert, [12] and [11], creates
expansion endless series forms, which a useful to become of fractals, see forms (21)(24),
R
end primes-numbers. The forms contains spectral invariant 2 , invariant 5 =
,
(5)
R
invariant 7 =
and general invariant complex function
(7)
S = s s = (a 0 + i b 0 ) (a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0
(95)
S
( 1 S ) (1 S) 0
2
and my zeta function:
QS
(S) = (1) = 2s sin
n
Here Q variable quantity of angle, see Pic.1 and Pic.2 :
0 Q
and
(S) = 2 S S 1 sin
(96)
(97-8)
(98-9)
n = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , ...
Remark
G.F.B. Riemann (1826 1866) observed that the frequency of prime numbers is
very closely related to the behavior of an elaborate function
( s) = 1 + 1 / 25 + 1 / 35 + 4 / 4 5 + +... called the Riemann Zeta function - see:
http://www.claymath.org/millennium.)
40
A1 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A2 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A3 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A 4 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
(99)
A 5 = c 0
For b 0 > a 0 , numbers
A 3 = (b 0 a 0 )
(100)
A 1 = ( b 0 a 0 )
(101)
are primesnumbers or
2
(b 0 a 0 )
(102)
R
7=
(7)
(103)
A 4 = (a 0 b 0 )
(104)
A 2 = (a 0 b 0 )
(105)
are primesnumbers or
2
(b 0 a 0 )
(106)
R
7=
(7)
(107)
41
(108)
A1 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A2 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A3 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
(109)
A 4 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A 5 = c 0
For b 0 > a 0 , numbers
A 3 = (b 0 a 0 )
2
(110)
2
A 1 = ( b 0 a 0 )
are primsnumbers
(111)
A 2 = (a 0 b 0 )
are primsnumbers
(112)
(113)
7 =
(7 )
divide numbers
2
(b 0 a 0 )
(114)
(115)
42
and
R
7=
(7 )
divide numbers
(b 0 a 0 )
then are
A5 = c0
primesnumbers
(116)
(117)
(118)
A1 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
A2 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A3 = (b0 a0 ) if b0 > a0
(119)
A 4 = (a0 b0 ) if a0 > b0
A 5 = c 0
Lets take from the book [1], see page17, ready triads
of primitive Pythagorean triads
(b 0 , a 0 , c 0 ) :
1 : (4,3,5)
2 : ( 20,21,29)
3 : (60,11,61)
4 : (12,5,13)
5 : (12,35,37 )
6 : (56,33,65)
10 : ( 24,7,25)
7 : (8,15,17)
8 : (40,9,41)
11 : ( 28,45,53)
9 : (16,63,65)
12 : (48,55,73)
(120-33)
Triad 4 :
2
(b 0 a 0 ) = 4 3 = 1 prime number
A5 = c0 = 13 prime number
Triad 5 :
2
(a 0 b 0 ) = 35 12 = 23 prime number
A5 = c0 = 37 prime number
Triad 7 :
2
(a 0 b 0 ) = 15 8 = 7 prime number
A5 = c0 = 17 prime number
Triad 8 :
2
(b 0 a 0 ) = 40 9 = 31 prime number
A5 = c0 = 41 prime number
Triad 12 :
2
(a 0 b 0 ) = 55 48 = 7 prime number
A5 = c0 = 73 prime number
Primitive Pythagorean triads, which
44
Triad 6 :
(0 / 5) = 65 / 5 = 13 prime number
2
(b 0 a 0 ) = 56 33 = 23 prime number
Triad 9 :
c0 / 5 = 65 / 5 = 13 prime number
2
(a 0 b 0 ) = 63 16 = 47 prime number
Triad 10 :
c0 / 5 = 25 / 5 = 5 prime number
2
(b 0 a 0 ) = 24 7 = 17 prime number
7 =
(7)
divide number
2
R
(7 )
divide number
45
(b 0 a 0 ) = 60 11 = 49 / 7 = 7 prime number
then
A 5 = c0 = 61
Prime number
Intercommunication
a between the elliptical curves,
Abel group
and the non-modular forms.
According [1], chapter 11, section A , the key moment is to connect information of elliptical
curve of Frey with analytical function of complex variable and global invariant infinite
product of simple numbers p :
As realization that statement I propose a solution
possible variant of equation Freys-Yaroshs:
2
Y = ( X A ) X ( X + B ) =
n
= ( ao bo c o )
where
( X A ) = a0
X = bo
( X + B ) = c 0
And
ao = v 2 u 2
b o = 2vu
co = v 2 + u2
primitive Pythagorean triplets.
In this case we have endless series non-modular curves.
Because:
Here every number from endless series prime numbers
2
A1 = ( b0 a0 )
if b o
will not divide into
> ao
16 = 4 ( b0 = 2vu) =
4 ( b0 = 2 2 1) =
2
= ( 22 ) 2 = ( 2 ) 2
47
If number
16 =
(ao bo c o )4n
2
(ao b o c o ) 2n
28
2
2
27 = 9 ( a 0 = v 2 u 2 ) =
= 9 ( a o = 2 2 12 ) =
= 33
if odd number 27 is equivalent:
+ 4a o 3
27 =
2
bo
where
3
= ( 4 a o + 27 b o )
discriminant for canonical form any elliptic curves:
Y 2 = x 3 + ao x + bo
With all this going on to make good use multitude
construction to analytical function of complex variable:
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b 0 = 0
and
S n = s n s n = (a0 + i b0 ) (a0 i b0 ) =
n
= a0 + b0 = z n
as general common invariants for systems co-ordinates A and B
It is complex functions.
I propose three of Rule for computation
all simple (prime) numbers :
Rule A, Rule B and Rule C.
See Part 2
And following research result a Riemanns statements.
Riemanns statement 1
Function:
48
( s ) = 2 s s1 Sin
s
(1 s) (1 s) 1
2
s1
My statement 1
Function:
s
( s ) = 2 s s1 Sin (1 s) (1 s) 1
2
determines all complex numbers
s1
if
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0 = 0 1
See Pic.2
where:
ao = v 2 u 2
b o = 2vu
co = v 2 + u2
2
ao + bo = c o
For all pairs number
v>u
s = 2, 4, 6, ...
My statement 2
Z(S ) = Sin Q S = 0 function determines endless series zeros b o = 0 for
S = 2 S , 4 S , 6 S , ...
If angle Q=0 , see Pic.2 and Pic. A , then:
49
+ i bo = 0
i bo = 0
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 = 1
what
ao = v u 2 = 1
2
b o = 2vu = 0
co = v 2 + u2 = 1
2
ao + bo = c o = 1
where v=1 and u=0 taken from:
v = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ...
u = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,...
Geometrical interpretation, see Pic. A
Pic. A
Riemanns statement 3
Forma:
(n)
1
= s
( s ) n =1 n
determines stripe
0 R (s) 1
50
1
+ it , tR
2
My statement 3
2 S = 2 where:
Let
2 = 2 0 + 2 1 + 2 2 + 2 3 + ... + 2 n + ... 2 if n
then:
1
2 = 1 + 2 . 2 = 2 + 2 + 2 3 + .... + 2 n + .... 1 if n
where:
2 =
1
+r
2
and
2
r = 2 + 2 + ... + 2
+ .... 0.5 if n
Forma:
(n)
1
= s
( s ) n =1 n
determines stripe
0 R (s) 1
1
+ ir , rR
2
as equivalent:
1
+ i , R
2
See Pic. B
Pic. B
51
Here:
Po int 1 z = ( + i ) = + i 0.5
2
Po int 2 z = ( + i ) = + i 1
2
Po int 3 z = ( + i ) = + i 1.5
2
........... +
1
Po int 1 z = ( i ) = i 0.5
2
Po int 2 z = ( i ) = i 1
2
Po int 3 z = ( i ) = i 1.5
2
............
Result
Forma:
(n)
1
= s
( s ) n =1 n
determines stripe
0 R( z) 1
0 R ( z) 1
for all untrivial zeros, see Pic.2 and Pic. A, when, angle
(S ) = 2S S 1 Sin
Q = ao = 0 :
S
(1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
S = s s = ( a0 + i b 0 ) ( a0 i b 0 ) = b o = 0
because:
b o = 2vu = 0
where v=1 and u=0 taken from:
v = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ...
u = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,...
52
Consequently,
exist endless series complex numbers
as endless series of zeros:
z = + i ( ao + i bo ) = 0
z = i ( a o i b o ) = 0
Forma:
1
( n)
= S 0
(S ) n=1 n
contain function:
1
( n ) = 2 = 2 + 2 + 2 3 + ... + 2 n + ... 1 if n
and complex function:
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 = 1
what
ao = v 2 u 2 = 1
b o = 2vu = 0
where v=1 and u=0 taken from:
v = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ...
u = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,...
Consequently, determines zeta function:
(S ) =
n =1
1
(n)
nS
53
PART6
Here
0 Re( z ) 1
Pic.3a
Remark
Authors of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture approve:
if (1) is equal to 0, then there are an infinite number
of rational points (solutions), and conversely, if (1) is not equal to 0,
then there is only a finite number of such points.
54
Pic. 4
Here :
Flatness ( , ) for complex numbers z = + i and z' = i ;
Point P = P ( z , z ) ; Point P' = P' ( , , Y ) ;
Axis absciss for ; Axis ordinat for ;
It is stereographycal projection flatness ( , )
to sphere ( , , Y )
ao
2
1 + a0 + bo
bo
2
1 + ao + bo
2
y=
ao + bo
2
1 + ao + bo
a0
1 + c0
bo
1 + co
co
1 + co
55
Pic.5
3. INITIAL DATA
V A R I A N T
D A T A 1
+ ib o +
ib o
Re (s ) = 0
(9)
Re (s ) = 0
According we have endless series numbers:
S = s s = a o + ib o a o ib o =
= o
(10)
o =
S = (v2 + u2 )
(11)
S = s, s = s s sin 0 = 0
(12)
56
S
( 1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
Here scalars S = 0 are arguments for theyre functions
.
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
(13)
Pic. 6
The axis of absciss a o is geometrical axis symmetry for two
a system coordinat.see Pic. 6.
Common the angle Q is general argument for general functions:
S
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
( 1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
(14)
VA R I A N T D A T A 2
If angle Q = 0 , see Pic. 7, then:
+ ib o = 0
ib o = 0
Re (s ) = a o
(15)
Re ( s ) = a o
According we have endless series numbers:
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
= a0
(16)
57
ao = S = ( v 2 u 2 )
(17)
S = [ s, s ] = s s sin 0 = 0
(18)
(S ) = 2 S S 1 sin
S
( 1 S ) (1 S ) = 0
2
(19)
+ i b0
ib o
Pic. 7
58
conversely, if (1) is not equal to 0, then there is only a finite number of such
points.
s = ao + i bo
s = a o i b o
or
z = + i
z' = i
(21)
s = s =
ao + b o
or
z = z' = +
2
(21)
co = v 2 + u 2
as a basis of two forms of general complex invariants
(two forms of complex functions)
2
S = (a o + b o ) = [ (a o ( i b o ) 2 ] = c o
(22)
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0 = 2
And also - as a basis of spectral invariant
59
= (o + c 0 + co + co + ... + co
+ ...)
if n
(23)
f n ( v > u ) = ( v 2 + u 2 )n
n
a + b = c
if n = 0,1,2,3,...
if n 2
A +B = C
x
(24)
f 0 ( v > u) = c0 = 1
f1 ( v > u ) = c 1 = v 2 + u 2
2
f 2 ( v > u ) = c o = v 4 + 2 v 2u 2 + u 4
3
f 3 ( v > u ) = c o = v 6 + u 6 + 3 v 4u 2 + 3u 4 v 2
4
f 4 ( v > u ) = c o = v + u + 6 v u + 4 v u + 4u v
8
(19)
.......................................................................................
n
f n ( v > u ) = c o = ( v 2 + u 2 )n
if n
6. General proof
Birch and Swinnerton Dyer
Conjecture
If angle Q = , see Pic.2 and Pic.3, then:
+ ib o +
ib o
Re (s ) = 0
(20)
Re (s ) = 0
and also to data of 3 7, on the EXPANDED complex plane of numbers:
z = + i
z' = i
and
all real coordinates = 0
. Hence, in the Decartes system of coordinates (, , Y ) is formed a line
of infinite set of ZERO:
Re(z ) = 0 and Re( z' ) = 0
Similar picture we have in the system of coordinates represented on Pic. 2:
Re(s ) = 0 and Re(s ) = 0
(21)
(22)
(23
( 1 ) (1 ) = 0
2
on the basis of spectral invariant:
( ) = 2 1 sin
1
= ( o + c 0 + c o
1
= 1 + ( o + c o
+ co
+ co
+ ... + c o
+ ... + c o
(24)
+ ...) =
+ ...) =
= 1 + if n
(25)
= 1 = ( )
(26)
(27)
s = ao + i bo
(28)
s = ao i bo
systems of coordinates, represented on Pic.2.
It means, that spectral :
1
= ( o + c 0 + c o
1
= 1 + ( o + c o
+ co
+ co
= 1 +
+ ... + c o
+ ... + c o
+ ...) =
+ ...) =
if n
(29)
(o + c 0 + co + co + ... + co + ...)
if n
(30)
and corresponding infinite row of integer decisions of the equations of the First type,
see (19).
Remark.
Spectral invariant is formed over field N of natural numbers.
It does not depend on a choice of coordinates and on operation
of display of complex numbers on the EXPANDED plane
of complex numbers.
If
s = ao + i bo
s = ao i bo
(31)
1
co
=
y=
co 1
co
1 + co
co
=1
1
co
1
co
(32)
+1
if
triads of Pythagorean:
a0 = v 2 u2
b 0 = 2 vu
c0 = v + u
2
(33)
2
u = 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 ,4 , ,....
v = (u + 1) = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ,...
(34)
bo
= co v 2
2v
b
v = ao + u 2 = o = co u 2
2u
2
u = v 2 ao =
(35)
s = a o + i b o z = + i
s' = a o i b o z' = i
(37)
62
(38)
z1 = 1; z 2 =
1
1
1
2
1
n1
+ i ; z 3 = + i ;..., z n = + i
;...
2
2
3
3
n
n
(39)
1
1
1
2
1
n 1
;...
i ; z'3 = i ;..., z'n = i
2
2
3
3
n
n
(40)
z'1 = 1; z'2 =
(41)
(42)
(43)
(44)
(45)
(46)
63
s = R (s ) + i t
z = + i
s' = R (s ) it
z' = i
(52)
then
description
The Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture
to answer description
the Riemann Hypothesis,
Pic.3a
Here 0 Re( z ) 1
PART7
S = s s sin Q 0
then, accordingly Pic. 2 :
+ i b0 = i bo 0
and for
S 0 dzeta function :
(S) = 2S S1 sin
S
( 1 S ) (1 S) 0
2
65
In this case, role can execute axis absciss a 0 of system A (about see).
And, finally, conclusion of Matiyasevich, who has proved 10-th problem of D.Hilbert,
proves to be true:
All prime numbers are simple search (recalculation)
of all of some natural numbers.
Such search (recalculation) is carried out by means of my three rules:
Rule A, Rule B and Rule C.
I dare say:
Riemann Hypothesis and Birch and Swinnerton-Dyerr Hypothesis are a link of two
systems of coordinates:
System A coordinates
for whole primitive numbers of Pythagorean, see Pic. 1.
and
System B coordinates for complex numbers , see Pic.2
As a basis for this statement - endless series natural numbers
and general system following equations
See about Plan 1
and
General common invariant or complex function
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0
66
Plan 1
a0 = v 2 u 2
b 0 = 2 vu
c0 = v 2 + u2
n2
+ b0
n2
+ b0
a = n a o (a 0
b = n b o (a 0
2
c = n c o (a 0
n2
+ b0
n2
+ c0
n2
+ c0
n2
+ c0
n2
)/ 3
n2
)/3
n2
)/ 3
a + b = c
67
1
1
1
1
If 1 + x + x + x + ... = x = ( x ) for x = S , then :
2
3
4
k =1 k
1
1
1
1
1 + S + S + S + ... = S = (S )
2
3
4
k =1 k
If S = 5 , then :
Here:
2 = ( 2 + 2 + 2 + 23 + ... + 2 + ... + 2 ) 2
0
spectral invariant .
If length of vector S is certain vertical straight line
S = s s sin Q 0
then, accordinglyPic. 2:
+ i b 0 = i bo 0
and for
(S ) = 2S S1 sin
S 0 :
S
( 1 S ) (1 S ) 0
2
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0
2
(a0 + b0 ) = c0 = S
It is GENERAL COMMON fundamental invariant for complex numbers and for
primitive numbers of Pythagora, see about formulas (13) and (15).
Accordingly formula (18):
68
A 1 = ( b 0 a 0 ) = [ b 0 + ( i a 0 ) 2 ]
A 2 = ( a 0 b 0 ) = [a 0 + ( i b 0 ) 2 ]
A 3 = ( b 0 a0 ) = b 0 S b 0
A 4 = (a0 b o ) = a0 S a0
2
A 5 = c 0 = a0 + b 0 = S
1
1 s
p
p
1
s
n =1 n
and
Correlatioons forms
1
1
1
1
1 + x + x + x + ... = x = ( x )
2
3 4
k =1 k
69
f (k ) = f (t )dt +
k =0
1
(f (0) + f (m)) +
2
B 2k
[f ( 2k 1) (m ) f ( 2k 1) (0)] +
k =1 ( 2k )!
mB 2n+ 2 ( 2k 1)
+
[f
(m ) f ( 2k 1) (0)] +
( 2n + 2)!
mB 2 N+ 2
+
f ( 2 m + 2 ) ( m )
( 2N + 2)!
here m , n = 1,2,3,... and 0 < < 1
+
B 2k ...
of Bernouli [4] .
B 2k contains ( 2k ) of Riemann:
( 2 k ) = ( 1)k 1
With formula of Eulers, for
( 2 ) 2k
B 2k
2 (2 k ) !
k 1
f (k )
k =1
If f (k ) =
1
, then we receive realization
kx
a equivalent for
1+
(x)
function
1
1
1
1
+ x + x + ... = x = ( x )
x
2
3
4
k =1 k
1
1
1
1
1 + 5 + 5 + 5 + ... = x = ( x )
2
3
4
k =1 k
Here { x ) function of Riemanns [7] .
In case
x=7
1
1
1
1
1 + 7 + 7 + 7 + ... = x = ( x )
2
3
4
k =1 k
70
1
1
1
1
+
+
+
+ .... =
5 ln 1 5 ln 2 5 ln 3 5 ln 4
1 1
1
1
1
1
= (
+
+
+
+ ...) = R
5 ln 1 ln 2 ln 3 ln 4
5
(5) =
1
1
1
1
+
+
+
+ ... =
7 ln 1 7 ln 2 7 ln 3 7 ln 4
1
1
1
1
1
1
= (
+
+
+
+ ...) = R
7 ln 1 ln 2 ln 3 ln 4
7
(C)
(7) =
(D)
R
5=
( 5)
And from the form (7) the spectral structure of number 7 follows:
R
7=
(7)
Number 5 closes the first fundamental nucleus
of natural numbers:
J5 = 1, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5
J7 = 1, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7
a 0 = 2 vu
b0 = v2 u2
c0 = v 2 + u 2
71
is a link of Plan 1 (Naturel basis), of two systems of readout (see Pic.1 and Pic 2) ,
of Gordans problem invariants , of P.Fermats problem and of Riemans function
(S ) , if
S = s s = (a 0 + i b 0 ) (a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0 = 0
David Hilbert, while solving the problem of Gordans invariants, presented a universal
formulation of this problem in the following way [12]:
Suppose, there is given an endless system of forms oa a finite number of variables.
Under what circumstances does a finite system of forms exist through which all others
are expressed in form of linear combinations whose coefficients are integral rational
function of the same variables?
The proof of the Gordan problem solved by D.Hilbert
was met by mathematicians very suspiciously.
Lindeman found the Hilberts method bein inconvenient, terrible and supernatural.
Gordan himself caracterized it as Das ist nicht mathematic. Das ist Theologie.
Universality of the given formulation lies in the fact it contains in a generalized form the
description of a final solution of the Last theorem of P.Fermat [11].
According [11] end Plan 1,
I would like the reader to pay attention to the fact that here:
I introduce the concept of Primitive Dyophantine triplets for the first time, which,
contrary to the primitive Pythagorean triplets, are always irrational. It is roots for
equation of P.Fermat.
David Hilbert, while solving the problem of Gordans invariants, presented a universal
formulation of this problem :
Suppose, there is given an endless system of forms of a finite number of variables.
Under what circumstances does a finite system of forms exist through which all others
are expressed in the form of linear combinations are integral rational functions of the
variables
Universality of the given formulation lies in the fact that it contains in a generalized
form the description of a final solution of the Last Theorem Fermats.
In our cause this infinitely multitude equations:
an + bn = cn
Each of which is realized at a concrete exponent of power n.
The number of the generalized variable is finite:
a , b , c, n .
In our case, use is made of three forms:
(a 0 a 0
n2
) + (b 0 a 0
n2
) + (b 0 b 0
n 2
) + (b 0 c 0
(a 0 b 0
(a 0 c 0
n2
) = (c 0 a 0
n2
) = (c 0 b 0
n2
) = (c 0 c 0
n2
n2
n 2
(E)
a0 + b0 = c0
72
Sa = a0
n2
Sb = b0
Sc = c0
n2
n2
Further on, lets add term by term the obtained equations (E) and arithmetically
average these sums.
As a result, we will obtain one combined equation:
2
(a 0 D n ) = (b 0 D n ) + (c 0 D n )
(F)
Here
Dn = (a0
n2
+ b0
n2
+ c0
n2
)/ 3
( a0 , b0 , c0 )
primitive Pythagorean triplets.
Usid equation (F), we mat write down
the identification of its components:
n
a = a 0 Dn
b = b 0 Dn
n
c = c 0 Dn
From these identification equations, we derive
following formulas for determining roots:
2
a = n a 0 Dn
2
b = n b 0 Dn
2
c = n c 0 Dn
for the basis Fermats equations :
n
a + b = c
an + bn = cn
if
a = a k
b = b k
c = c k
73
Riemann Hypothesis
See http://www.claymath.org/millenium
BegIn
Some numbers have the special property that they cannot be expressed as the product of
two smaller numbers, e.g., 2, 3, 5, 7, etc. Such numbers are called prime numbers, and they
play an important role, both in pure mathematics and its applications. The distribution of
such prime numbers among all natural numbers does not follow any regular pattern,
however the German mathematician G.F.B. Riemann (1826 1866) observed that the
frequency of prime numbers is very closely related to the behavior of an elaborate function
(s) = 1 + s + 1/3s + s + ...
called the Riemann Zeta function. The Riemann hypothesis asserts that all interesting
solutions of the equation
(s) = 0
lie on a certain vertical straight line.
End
S = s s = (a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0
74
s = ao + i bo
s = a o i b o
or
z = + i
z' = i
(21)
discovered their polisemy, which was seen by G.V. Leibnitz in his time ,
as unexplained wonder.
Complex numbers can be in the same time:
) complex numbers,
) points representing these numbers on complex plane,
) vectors, corresponding to these numbers.
The length of such vectors is determined by module:
s = s =
ao + b o
or
z = z' = +
2
(21)
co = v 2 + u 2
as a basis of two forms of general complex invariants
(two forms of complex functions)
2
S = (a o + b o ) = [ (a o ( i b o ) 2 ] = c o
(22)
S = s s = ( a 0 + i b 0 ) ( a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0 = 2
And also - as a basis of spectral invariant
o
= (o + c 0 + co + co + ... + co
+ ...)
if n
(23)
75
f n ( v > u ) = ( v 2 + u 2 )n
n
a + b = c
if n = 0,1,2,3,...
if n 2
A x + B y = Cz
Attached to :
(s) function is analitical function again
S = s s = (a 0 + i b 0 ) (a 0 i b 0 ) =
2
= a0 + b0 = 0
a 0 = 2 vu
b0 = v2 u2
c0 = v 2 + u 2
PAY ATTENTION TO:
If , according Pic. 2 :
s s = s s os Q
is scalar product and
[ ss] =S
is vectorial product , then about angle
Q0
A c c o r d i n g l y:
Length of vector
S = s s sin Q 0
76
according Pic. 2:
+ i b0 0
i b0 0
and for
S 0
(S ) = 2 S S1 sin
S
( 1 S ) (1 S ) 0
2
Note:
B.Riemann (1859) :
(s) function determines all complex numbers S 1 .
(s) function determines the zeros for S = 2 , 4 , 6 , , , ,
Functional equation
and forma
determines stripe
for
It is logarithmical equivalent for Riemann Hypothesis as
analog for me logarithmical forms (C) and (D).
In the system coordinat B, see (B), axis symmetry
is axis
77
s = a0 + i b0
If
+ i b0 0
i b0 0
then
RESULT
All endless (unlimited) series of prime- numbers
determinats four my forms:
( A i A i 1 ) = 2
or
( A i A i 1 ) = 2
( A i A i 1 ) = 2 2
( A i A i 1 ) = 3 2
( A i A i 1 ) = 4 2
which create folloving real numbers :
Re(S ) =
22 1
=
4 2 2
Re(S ) =
3 2 3
=
42 4
contains
Re(S ) =
2 2 1
=
4 2 2
Consequece:
is equivalent
2 2
+ it , t R
4 2
78
RIEMANNS HYPOTHESIS
IS FINALLY PROVED FOR ALL SEROS ABOUT
+ i b0 0
i b0 0
Such search (recalculation)
is carried out by means of my three rules.
See about Rule A forms (30), Rule B forms (31),
Rule C forms (32) and forms (21)-(24).
PART8
Commentary
to the question of Dyophantines equations
and their irrational roots ,
containing information of
non-modular elliptical curves.
Professor of mathematics from New York Courant mathematical Institute
Harold Edwards- the biggest specialist of numbers theory
in his book The last theorem of Fermat, [3], writes:
In ARITHMETICS of Dyophantines are analyzed only rational numbers.
So there is no sense to doubt that Fermat meant
absence of rational numbers :
x ,y,z
such as that:
n
x + y n = z n (n > 2 )
In book [1] Fermats Last Theorem for Amateurs, another outstanding specialist
in theory of numbers Paulo Ribenboim tells his readers:
Dyophantine and then Fibonacci , indicated the following method
of search of solutions of Pythagorean equation :
X 2 + Y2 = Z2
If whole numbers v and u are such that v > u and
greatest common divisor GCD (v, u)=1 , at that v and u of different evenness
that triads a o , b o , c o , given by equations:
ao = v 2 u 2
b o = 2vu
co = v 2 + u2
Are primitive solutions of Pythagorean equation.
At that lets keep in mind that Pythagoreans equation is particular
conception of Dyophantines equation by Pierre Fermat:
79
an + bn = c n
at n 2
General consequence
members of the equation
an + bn = c n
can be seen
as members of more general equation of A.Beal:
A x + B y = Cz
at condition that members of this equation have common multiplier.
Example 1
We have equation
A x + B y = Cz
and equivalent this equation
39 + 543 = 311
if A=3, B=54, C=3, x=9, y=3, z=11 .
Here common multipliers:
and
39
27 3 + 54 3 = [ 27 3 3 2 ]
In this Dyophantines equation :
27 3 + 54 3 = [ 27 3 3 2 ] = z 3
all members are made of natural numbers.
But at that:
z = 3 [ 27 3 3 2 ] = 56.16226322...
is irrational number that corresponds to
the Last Theorem of Fermat.
80
Equation:
27 + 54 3 = z 3
3
Example 2
We have equation
A x + B y = Cz
and equivalent this equation
813 + 162 3 = z 3
Here A=3, B=162, C=3, x=12, y=3, z=14 .
Common multipliers in which are numbers :
3 and 312
All members of equations
813 + 162 3 = z 3
doesnt have whole-number solution.
Example 3
We have equation
A x + B y = Cz
and equivalent this equation
( 7.1789799 10 23 ) 3 + (1.435796 10 24 ) 3 = z 3
24
Here A = 9 , B = (1,435796 10 ) , C = 3 , x = 75, y = 3, z = 152
Common multipliers in which are numbers :
3 and 3150
All members of equations
81
( 7.1789799 10 23 ) 3 + (1.435796 10 24 ) 3 = z 3
are made of natural numbers.
But at that:
z = 3 3152 = 1.493288... 10 24
is irrational number that corresponds to
the Last Theorem of Fermat.
Equation:
( 7.1789799 10 ) + (1.435796 10 24 ) 3 = z 3
23 3
Axp + Byq = Czr . Bull. London. Math. Soc.27(1995), 513-543. See [8] .
Authors of this publication think that there is a limited variety
of solutions , INDIRECTLY supporting fairness of A.Beal hypothesis .
Authors give ten examples, quasi supporting their conclusion.
Among these examples there is the following one:
1 + 23 = 32
25 + 7 2 = 34
7 3 + 13 2 = 2 9
2 7 + 17 3 = 712
3 5 + 114 = 122 2
17 7 + 76271 3 = 21063928 2
1414 3 + 2213459 2 = 65 7
43 8 + 96222 3 = 30042907 2
9262 3 + 15312283 2 = 113 7
33 8 + 1549034 2 = 15613 3
But in this examples there are
no common multipliers A, B and C .
So they have nothing in common with common problem
of A. Beal and P. Fermat.
However
All these equations are easily resulted to form of equation of Fermat
82
Example
1 414 3 + y 3 = z 3
x 2 + 2 213 459 2 = z 2
All members of equivalents equations
x = 1 414 3 = 53 170.91258...
y = 3 2 213 459 2 = 16 984.30000...
z = 3 657 = 16 987.56633...
is irrational numbers that corresponds to
the Last Theorem of Fermat end the Pythagorean theorem.
Equations:
1 414 3 + y 3 = z 3
x 2 + 2 213 459 2 = z 2
doesnt have whole-number solution.
Following the logics of the above said lets make
DIAGONAL system of three Dyophantines equations with three unknown x , y , z :
X n = x n + x 2 y n 2 + x 2 z n 2
2
Y n = y 2 x n 2 + y n + y o z n 2
Z n = z 2 x n 2 + z 2 y n 2 + x n
Considering:
x = ao
y = bo
z = co
We get diagonal system from three Dyophantines equations,
which are built from primitive Pythagorean triads:
83
n2
n 2
n 2
n2
+ bo + bo c o
n 2
+ c o bo
A n = ao + ao bo
B n = bo ao
Cn = c o ao
+ ao c o
n 2
+ co
2
n 2
n
a 22 = b o
M = a 21 = b o a o
2
n 2
2
n 2
a 32 = c o b o
a 31 = c o a o
2
n 2
a 23 = b o c o
n
a 33 = c o
a13 = a o c o
n 2
xn , y n , zn
and numbers a o
correspondingly.
, bo , co
a = n A n = A = n ao + ao bo
2
n2
+ ao c o
n 2
b = n B n = B = n b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
2
c = n Cn = C = n c o ao
n 2
+ co bo
n 2
n 2
+ co
an + bn = c n
Here we become witnesses of transformation of Abels group into group of irrational
numbers, as all three sub-radical expressions are built of commuted whole numbers.
If we divide sub-radical expression into 3, we will get new irrational meanings
for roots of Fermats equation :
a a o
b b o
c c o
which at n = 2 become identical
to primitive triads of Pythagorean:
84
ao = v 2 u 2
b o = 2vu
co = v 2 + u2
My algorithm demonstrates dualism of solutions for Fermats equations.
The first (superficial) level of solutions make
triads of irrational numbers:
n
a = n A n = A = n ao + ao bo
2
n2
+ ao c o
n2
b = n B n = B = n b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
2
c = n Cn = C = n c o ao
n2
+ co bo
n2
n2
+ co
And
n
a = n A = A = n ( a o + a o b o
n 2
+ ao c o
n 2
b = n B = B = n ( b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
c = n C = C = n ( c o a o
n 2
+ co bo
n 2
n 2
)/3
)/3
+ co ) / 3
ao = v 2 u 2
b o = 2vu
co = v 2 + u2
From these whole-number solutions of deep level
are made irrational solutions:
n
a = n A n = A = n ao + ao bo
2
n2
+ ao c o
n2
b = n B n = B = n b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
2
c = n Cn = C = n c o ao
n2
+ co bo
n2
n2
+ co
And
n
a = n A = A = n ( a o + a o b o
n 2
+ ao c o
n 2
b = n B = B = n ( b o a n 2 + b o + b o c o
c = n C = C = n ( c o a o
n 2
+ co bo
n 2
n 2
)/3
)/3
+ co ) / 3
85
Det M = Det ( A n , B n , C n ) =
2
= 3 (ao b o c o ) 3 ( ao b o c o ) =
=0
It means the multitude of vectors is a linear dependant multitude of vectors,
in which are reflected fundamental features of elliptical curve of Freys-Yaroshs :
Y 2 = ( X A ) X ( X + B) =
n
= ( ao bo c o )
at condition of identification:
( X A ) = a0
X = bo
( X + B) = c 0
B = ao
Example 1
If
ao = 3
bo = 4
co = 5
and
n=5
5
c o = 243
5
b o = 1024
5
c o = 3125
then
86
A = ( b o a o ) = 781
Here number
5
5
A = ( b o a o ) = 781
will not divide into
16 = 4 ( b0 = 2vu) =
= 4 ( b0 = 2 2 1) = 24
because
781
= 48.8125 ...
16
and will not divide
27 = 9 3 = 3 3
because
781
= 28.92592 ...
27
Example 2
We have primitive Pythagoreans triplet:
a 0 = 12
b 0 = 35
c 0 = 37
accordingly:
2
Y 2 = a0 b0 c 0 =
= 144 1225 1369 =
= 241491600
and
Y = a 0 b 0 c 0 = 15540
accordingly
2
( X A ) = a 0 = 144
2
X = b 0 = 1225
2
( X + B ) = c 0 = 1369
and
B = 1369 X =
= 1369 1225 = 144
A = X 144 =
= 1225 144 = 1081
Here number
87
A = 1081
will not divide into
16 = 4 ( b0 = 2vu) =
4 ( b0 = 2 2 1) =
2
= ( 22 ) 2 = ( 2 ) 2
because
1081
= 67.5625 ...
16
and will not divide
27 = 9 3 = 3 3
because
1081
= 40.0370 ...
27
PART 9
Here is not the best place to come to detailed philosophical or psychological analysis of
mathematics. Any where I'd like to stress a few moments. Excessive underlining of
axiomatic- deductive character of mathematics seems to be very dangerous. Of course,
beginning of any constructive creative work
(intuitive origin) is a source of our ideas and arguments, hardly keeps within simple
philosophical formula; and anywhere just this origin is a genuine core of any mathematical
discovery, even if it belongs to the most abstract spheres. If a target is a clear deductive
form, so the motive of mathematics is intuition and construction., [6].
Being directed by this initial position of outstanding mathematician R. Curant I offer to
readers attention a result of intuitive construction from which can follow any axiomaticdeductive constructions. Here is the beginning of such constructions for endless series
solutions for equation by A.Beal:
A x + B y = Cz
Conjecture Yarosh
Let B i = ( A , B, C, x, y , z ) be positive integers
with x, y , z > 2 .
If
A x + B y = Cz ,
then
x, y , z > 2 have a common factor.
Proof
If
S 3 = ( 33 ) n
mathematical fractal , then
88
A x = 3 3n
B y = 2 3 33n
C z = 3 2 3 3n
For
A = x 3 3n
y
B = 2 3 3 3n
C = z 3 2 3 3n
and
x = 3n
y=
3 ln 2 + 3 ln 3
ln B
z = 2 + 3n
Result:
A x + B y = Cz
as basis for Fermats equation
Exemplication 1
If n=4 , then according ( ):
A=3
B = 162
C=3
According ( ) :
x = 3 4 = 12
3 ln 2 + 3n ln 3
=
ln B
2.079441542 + 13.18334746
=
=
5.097596335
=3
y=
Consequently
89
n = 13
According ( )
A x = 3 3 n = 3 39 = 4.0525552 1018
B y = 2 3 3 3 n = 3.2420442 1019
C z = 3 2 3 3 n = 3.6472997 1019
Consequently
[(1 + 2 3 ) = ( 3 2 )] 3 3 n =
= 33n + 23 33n = 32 33n
= 3 39 + 8 3 39 = 9 3 39 =
= 1 594 323 3 + 3 188 646 3 = 3 316 325.4813
here common multiplier
3n
= 3 39 = 4.0525552 1018
Reference
[1]. P.Ribenboim, Fermats Last Theorem for Amateurs,
Copiright ,1999, Springer-Verlag,New York, Inc.All Rights Reserved,
Chapter 1,section 1.1, Chapter 11.2, section A, formula (2.1).
[2]. Wiles A. 1995. Modular elliptic curves and Fermats
Last Theorem. Annals of Mathematics 141:4
[3]. H.Edvards, Fermats Last Theorem, Springer-Verlag,
New York Heidelberg Berlin, 1977, Chapter 1 , section 1.1.
[4] M.M.Postnikov, Teorema Ferma,Moscow, Nauka,1978, s.14,18,128.
[5] Y.Zivotov, Internet
[6], R.Courant and H.Robbins, What is Mathematics?,
Oxford University Press, London-New York-Toronto, 1947, Capter 2, 3.
90
91