umbuchanan said:a<SUP>4</SUP>+b<SUP>4</SUP>+c<SUP>4</SUP>+d<SUP>4</SUP>=(a+b+c+d)<SUP>4</SUP> has infinitely many nontrivial integer solutions. The proof of this was published this month and utilises Mazur's theorem that an elliptic curve has at most 16 rational torsion points. (Note this was also used by Wiles to prove Fermat's Last Theorem).
I've attached the article.
He's saying for that identity, there are infinitely many non-zero integer solutions.jamesboyd9 said:um
what?
a<SUP>4</SUP>+b<SUP>4</SUP>+c<SUP>4</SUP>+d<SUP>4</SUP> absolutly does not equal (a+b+c+d)<SUP>4</SUP>
(a+b+c+d)<SUP>4 </SUP>= a<SUP>4</SUP> + ... like a billion combinations of a,b,c & d ... + d<SUP>4</SUP>
what am I missing here?
+1kurt.physics said:sin2ø + cos2ø = 1
is quite unique
hahahahahah u must be some hilarious guy lol.tau281290 said:I think 1 + 1 = 2 is quite remarkable knowing that this is the origin of where all other math equations are derived. The origins of 1 + 1 has been long lost in the histories of thousands of years since human civilisation developed. Nevertheless, perhaps the Neanderthals also employed such a remarkable equation.
LoL
integration by parts is just the reverse product rule.samwell said:dont noe y but i seem to like integration by parts formula.
I think newtons method is pretty cool how it is derived. The estimation of a root using gradient and fuction. The derivation was a smart thing. Although i dislike Newton's Character he was a smart dude. An application of maths to physics formulas like Newtons law of gravitation.tacogym27101990 said:integration by parts is just the reverse product rule.
but yeah i think anyone who can come up with these formula's is pretty insane