Physics education research, electronic materials, and the musings of Christopher Moore, Ph.D.

Hi, my name is Zachary Stanczak and I've recently came up with a theory about Fermat's theorem and how it has to do with many other concepts we've failed to connect.

This may seem hard to follow, but I believe my theory makes sense, if you just sort of accept a few fallacies into account.

First, we must say math is not a constant, and merely how we started to apply value to things that we wanted, had, or seen(like probability). 1+1=~ essentially.

See, we've been at the helms of our own form of philosophy and taken it as a constant, when it merely became and evolved for of divination(read:divide).

Okay, I know this seems weird, but I implore you to keep reading.

So we know, according to western principles, 1+2=3 (or more complicatedly, a^n+b^n=c^n and n=<2). 2, however represents the concept of ~, so 2 could also be read as 1, because 1 at it's lowest integer times itself is still 1.3. What this means is 1 time itself will always be .3, and each "value" or ".1" has the ability to become a ".03". Or ~ since it continues forth.

This is what E=mc^2 means essentially as well, or Mass times Concept has infinite energy, or anything to do with an infinite concept.

However, what we do have is "0". And zero times anything is always zero. Zero Effort equals Zero product.

But now let's step aside and look at this from the otherwise of the globe. What we know is that the origin of algrebra came from the middle eastern area(in their prime), as they pursued more knowledge based activities while more European cultures censored and worried about more direct approaches(like straight lines). The eastern philosophy is always family before the me, or I. Where you came from, etc. The zero before the 1. And also that when they count they start with zero. So as there's no concept of absolute nothing.

Now, if you apply this to Fermat's theorem and either solve it backwards, switch it around or use division, the answer comes back to 0 in this case. However, there zero is our 1, thus rendering both concepts the same.

So now if you to solve both problems at the same time in their respective ways, you'd have 3 options: zero over zero(0/0) zero over 1(0=/1) or one over 1(1=1).

So, i think Fermat's point was more of a joke. That when this concepts are combined, and we realize that everything started at the basic concept of 1 and 0, it can be implied to all math and philosophy, especially once you realize that math, is..

Inherently it's own language, with the use of letters only to imply concepts of values to make things easier to understand, as opposed to a hard fact. Sort of like Divination, to divide. You can't have a negative because it's impossible to have something without proof.

Proof(P for Proton) must have three things. It must be noticed(the Schrodinger's Cat concept proves this), must have an effect(however slight) on the world around it and have one witness. When can then either fight(dispute), ignore(or lie) or run(hide). These three options then transfer to three more options for each.

Now with that in mind we must understand probablity is merely the sense that something happens or it doesn't, yes or no, (1 or 0), on or off. These inherently each have their own three reactions afterwords, with the nothing only having the option to eventually become something(can't make nothing from something).

Now, at a basic level we can also understand that each letter and sound can correspond with positive, negative and neutral undertones. Hence why this(AnBnE8) can make sense, in context(a to the power of n plus b to the power of n Equals Infinite).

Now if we apply that positive, negatives and neutrals can work with sound and letters, but are both alternated when applies east and west, one set of cultures more dependent on sound, we can understand why people can feel the music. Or soundwaves that produce certain reactions in the body. Or how an Alpha cordinates an attack with sound on the enemy or prey. Once you see that algebra was merely a form of explanation, you can see a^n inherent flaw in a lot of theories we governor as truths(this is why Kelvin works the best because it starts at zero).

Does this makes sense so far?