Skip to main content

Fermat’s Last Theorem [Fermat's Enigma] – Simon Singh *****

Just as the US publishers of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone reckoned the US public couldn’t cope with the word ‘philosopher’ and changed the title, this is calledFermat’s Enigma in the US (it could also be because of another book of the same name by Amir Aczel). But crazy assumptions from publishers apart, it’s the superb story of a bizarre little problem that no one could solve until the ever-wily mathematician Fermat scribbled in a margin that he had a wonderful solution, only there wasn’t room to write it down.
Fermat may well have been boasting, but it threw down a gauntlet to hundreds of mathematicians who were to follow until it was finally achieved in the 20th century. Don’t worry if the maths doesn’t interest you – the story will, both in its historical context and in the insight into the work and nature of modern mathematicians.
In some ways the star of the book is Andrew Wiles, the British Mathematician who pretty well single-handedly cracked the problem with an unusual level of secrecy, rather than the typical sharing approach of the profession. But equally it’s Fermat himself.
Whether or not Fermat actually had a solution is a moot point – but he certainly didn’t have Wiles’ complex approach. In fact it seems so difficult to come up with a straightforward solution to this problem that Fermat has to be more than a little doubted.
Like all the best popular science books – and this certainly is one of the best – it brings in a whole range of extras historically and mathematically to add to the fascinating cast. What can I say? Buy it!

Paperback:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you 
Review by Brian Clegg
Community Review – Katy
I am 12 years old and I love maths. This book was amazing! It is the best book I have ever ever read. I really enjoyed all of it. I especially liked the bits with examples in because it helped me to understand more because I am doing my GCSE in maths in 4 months. It was fascinating to learn about the theorem and the story behind it. It tells you about lots of different people who have attempted to prove the theorem. It also talks about lots of different areas of mathematics associated with the theorem that do not even sound remotely similar. It is amazing to think that such a simple theorem has taken so long to solve – 358 years in fact. This book has been so inspirational to me. It has made my passion for mathematics stronger. I would strongly recommend it to anyone. You will not be able to put it down!!!!!!!!
Additional Review – Stephen Goldberg – ****
Fermat’s last theorem was that a certain equation, under certain circumstances, had no possible solution. This theorem was finally proven in 1995 by mathematician Andrew Wiles. What made Fermat’s last theorem so intriguing to mathematicians was that Pierre de Fermat, in 1637, claimed to have proven it but left behind no written proof. Since that time and until 1995, mathematicians around the world have been trying to prove this theorem. It is not even known if Fermat himself actually proved it. The object of this book was to explain how this puzzle was finally solved. But the book is not just about Andrew Wiles. Author Simon Singh takes the reader through a fascinating tour of the history of mathematics before delivering the solution to us.
On his way to proving Fermat’s theorem, Wiles used a variety of techniques developed by earlier mathematicians. When Singh takes us though Wiles work and the use of earlier mathematical tools, he takes extensive detours to give significant biographical information on these earlier mathematicians. In this, Singh did a most admirable job. The book starts with Wiles’ presentation of his proof in 1993, but quickly detours to discuss the Greek mathematicians Pythagoras and Euclid. As Singh leads us through mathematical history he also pays significant attention to notable mathematicians Leonhard Euler (1707-1783), David Hilbert (1862-1943), and Alan Turing (1912-1954), among others. Particularly interesting was the chapter “A mathematical disgrace” where Singh discusses the difficulties faced by women mathematicians, most notably Sophie Germaine (1776-1831) and Emmy Nother (1882-1935). Also interesting was how Wiles worked in almost complete seclusion for a number of years. After Wiles presented his proof in 1993, errors were found, and he struggled for another two years before finally completing his work.
Where the book fails is in trying to actually explain number theory. There is a lot of math in this book, some of it relegated to appendices at the end. Very difficult to understand were E-series and M-series. Singh also failed to adequately explain mathematical techniques such as the method of Kolyvagin and Flach or the Taniyama–Shimura conjecture. If the objective of the book was to actually explain the proof of Fermat’s theorem then it fails as I understood it no better after having read the book than before. Where the book succeeds is in explaining how mathematicians build on other mathematician’s work and how a proof in mathematics, based on logical reasoning, is conceptually different than proof in other sciences that are based on experimentation and observation. The writing style was very accessible and easy to understand (aside from the math) and the biographies he writes are fascinating. Overall, this book was well worth reading for anyone interested in the history of science or mathematics.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Life Works - Philip Ball *****

Wow. This is quite simply the best biology book I've ever read. At its heart are two essentials: one is the science mantra 'It's more complex than we thought', and the other is that the public at large - and even many biologists - have put too much focus on genetics as the central shaping force of life and the inner development and workings of organisms, coming close to ignoring the many other layers of complex systems that make life what it is and drive evolution. You would think we would have got the message about 'It's more complex than we thought,' and the associated concept that 'It's more complex than we tell you at school or in science TV shows' by now. It's true of all the sciences. In physics, for example, we've known that the reality is more complicated than 'light is wave' for over a century now. But biological systems are so vastly more intricate and messy than anything dealt with in physics. Until recently, even those

Fluke - Brian Klaas ****

On the whole, popular science books tell us about what science and scientists have achieved. Fluke is very different in this respect - in it, social scientist and professor of global politics Brian Klaas tells us about what the social sciences have failed to achieve, and why. Perhaps the most familiar aspects of this are in introducing the reader to the implications of chaos theory and of complexity, plus the fall out of the replication crisis that has rendered many older (and quite a few new) social science studies useless. Using plenty of engaging stories (including the fact that his own existence is the outcome, amongst other things, of a horrific killing) Klaas builds a picture of just how many small inputs come together to make anything happen in the complex system of human society. The implication of this is that is practically impossible to usefully predict the future in the social sciences (so much for Asimov's psychohistory) - in fact, hardly any social science (which incl

A Chorus of Big Bangs - Adam Susskind ***

This is an oddity, which is trying to do something that scientists usually avoid at all costs: making us think about what we take on faith when we consider cosmology. If the 'F' word is a problem for you, I wouldn't bother to read any further, but Adam Susskind is certainly right to point out it is not just the religious part of the world population who rely on faith - to take the atheist standpoint that most scientists espouse also requires faith in the adequacy of sometimes tenuous theories when dealing with a science as hands-off as cosmology. Susskind does a good job of identifying a range of cosmological theories that have been repeatedly patched up when holes have been found, to the extent that some now feel quite flaky. Many of the theories Susskind identifies are indeed currently problematic, but easily replaced by a better future scientific theory - for example dark matter, dark energy and inflation. Others are more fundamental and we genuinely don't have a par