Need a Math Solution!

Originally posted by shbaz
What makes you guys assume it's a power function? Parenthesis have always meant multiplication in my math books, without exception.

Actually, once you get to high school, parenthesis mean "function of".

A(n) reads as "A of n", much like f(x).

The reason everyone's assuming it's a power function is because that's how the problem was described. Read the OP.

Yea..I'm taking differential equations and i'm seeing no way to solve the equation of last theorm. That's a tough one. where z^n i'll email my professor.

Only question i have is...Why is your son learning power rules in 3rd grade?

Unless he's just trying to learn A^n = A x A x A x A where the number of times A gets multiplied is just n. then so on after you place constants where the variables are.

That seems most logical.

The theorem has never been proven directly. To prove it, you have to show that it's equivalent to something else that you can prove. Never covered it in class, though.

Originally posted by sisonek
it looks like your kid's teacher mentioned fermat's last theorem: mathworld.wolfram.com...,

which is the claim that x^n + y^n = z^n (x to the n plus y to the n equals z to the n) has no positive-integer solutions for integer n > 2. Ie, for n =2 this is equation just the pythagorean theorem:

that in a right triangle with sides a, b, and hypotenuse c, then a^2 + b^2 = c^2. Moreover, there are examples of integer a,b,c that make this work: 3^2 + 4^2 = 9 + 16 = 25 = 5^2, for example.

Fermat's last theorem says that for n > 2, you can no longer find any three integers x,y,z such that x^n + y^n = z^n, and the proof of that claim has taken almost three hundred years to find, and was definitely among the most difficult math problems of all time (thus far).

LOL i made this problem ALOT harder than i needed to. I thought you still had A^n + B^n + C^n = Z^n lmao wow yea...

In that case where A^n + B^n = Z^n easy to see and solve after looking at the website and especially by just using pythag's theorm

Originally posted by Ut
The theorem has never been proven directly. To prove it, you have to show that it's equivalent to something else that you can prove. Never covered it in class, though.

say what prove what theorm? which one are you talking about?

Originally posted by CookieMonster000
hmm i erno im in the 8th grade and i havent gotten a problem like that ever!

Yes good point this isn�t a grade 3 question. In grade 3 you should be learning basic math tables and such. And doing things like mad minutes but not this variable stuff... Chances are your child wouldn�t even be able to understand it.

[edit on 10/1/2004 by SirKillallott]

Originally posted by Aether

Originally posted by Ut
The theorem has never been proven directly. To prove it, you have to show that it's equivalent to something else that you can prove. Never covered it in class, though.

say what prove what theorm? which one are you talking about?

Fermat's last theorem. Was there discussion of another one? I must have missed it.

Fermat's is based on the Diophantine Equation. Look at the website a little you'll see it floating around in the form posted previously. Theorm's are not Law's you also have to remember that. So technically you don't have to base a theorm off anything besides common accepted knowledge. Look at the big bang theory its all based off common sense, and has a lot of holes in it.

Theory != thorem.

A theorm is a mathematical concept which has a definite proof. The only proof a theory has is proof that it is wrong.

The big bang theory is not based on common sense at all. It's based on emperical observations. Background static, the idea that the cosmic redshift is doppler in nature, and a relationship between the distances to other galaxies and the speed at which they're receeding from us. Common sense isn't used in the sciences because, more often than one would care to admit, it in no way describes reality.

The proof of Fermat's theorem isn't trivial. I've had it explained to me, and I zoned out in about thirty seconds. I don't have the head for proving theorems.

Whoops. I did a little google search assuming that the parenthesis are power notation and came up with this site.

Still, way tough for third grade.

Okay, I go away for a few hours and you all went wild! Thanks for all of your help

To clarify:

Upon further questioning, it was not asked of him to solve it, just to find who and where the solution was given. I'm not sure he wrote it down correctly, but I personally felt it was Fermat's Last.

And, for the record, the value of (n) is greater than 2.

Edit: Spelling

[edit on 1-10-2004 by everlastingnoitall]

LOL I have take Differential Equations and even we havent seen it. Trust me big guy this is not a fourth grade problem, its probably something easy like others have said.

well its very diffrent why don;t you ask your son where did he get it from
cause the n in the brackets must have to be multplied by a,b,c, or somthing

Originally posted by Ut


The big bang theory is not based on common sense at all. It's based on emperical observations. Background static, the idea that the cosmic redshift is doppler in nature, and a relationship between the distances to other galaxies and the speed at which they're receeding from us. Common sense isn't used in the sciences because, more often than one would care to admit, it in no way describes reality.

lol
LOL
LOL


whats your educational background?

[edit on 2-10-2004 by Aether]

Undergraduate degree in astrophysics...

Now, mind telling me what's so funny?

[edit on 2/10/2004 by Ut]

Well, like I said, I think I agree that it is referring Fermat's Last, but I need to ask his teacher on Monday. Probably my kid wrote it down wrong.

i think, shbaz, the way you phrased your last statement was misleading. never, really, does it describe our reality, because our reality doesnt involve borrowing energy, matt-anti-matter reactions, or the first three minutes. well never know, really, what happened, so in a way its not reality, but its a damn good explanation.

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
i think, shbaz, the way you phrased your last statement was misleading. never, really, does it describe our reality, because our reality doesnt involve borrowing energy, matt-anti-matter reactions, or the first three minutes. well never know, really, what happened, so in a way its not reality, but its a damn good explanation.

Are you sure you meant to post in this thread?

lol, yes. simply a response to a question about what you said. defending it, if you will. the actual topic of this thread got tossed around in circles about five times, before deciding we needed the guy who wrote the damn thing, not a proof.

Third Grade...Wow when I was in third grade that just consisted of multiplication.....