The argument is circular: https://mathoverflow.net/questions/42512/awfully-sophisticated-proof-for-simple-facts/42519#comment100811_42519 …pic.twitter.com/PhPscz4mzO
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Thanks for this. I felt that using the Fermat-Wiles theorem was lifting a heavy rock for a "simple" proof.
If we want a full proof, you'll need more envelopes
Don't get it, what does this prove? :) Maybe too simple for me to understand
It proves the cubed root of three isn't a fraction of two whole numbers cause no number exists that solves that last equation
.. the proof to which, however, doesn't fit in the margin .. or on the back of the envelope ..
In fact, it works for the n-th roto for n>=3
yeah, and it's well known that Fermat's last theorem is also "back of envelope proof" 
What did Andrew Wiles prove?
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.