Most people are familiar with the Pythagorean Theorem which describes a right triangle: a^2 b^2 = c^2. However, what you may not know is that Pierre Fermat claimed back in the 1600s to be able to prove that a^n b^n = c^n has no whole number solutions for n > 2. Trial and error suggests this to be true, but for over 350 years, no one could prove it. This is the story of the equation and those who worked towards the eventual solution in the early 1990s, from Pythagoras through Andrew Wiles, who published the final proof. His proof is complicated enough that I suspect Fermat's proof was flawed, but it makes for a surprisingly engrossing read all the same. There are tons of names and personal stories in this book, and though they often feel tangential, every single person discussed has great bearing in one way or another on the solving of Fermat's Last Theorem. One doesn't usually equate mathematics with drama or suspense, but both are present here. Definitely recommended for anyone with even a passing interest in math or history.Note: The UK version of this book, which I have, is titled Fermat's Last Theorem. The American version is called Fermat's Enigma. There is also another book called Fermat's Last Theorem which was written by Amir D. Aczel. Confusion abounds. ( )

May 31, 2009. Yesterday I finished reading Fermat's Last Theorem. I plan to write a glowing book review but this space is too limited to contain it. ( )

30 October 2001
Fermat's Enigma
Simon Singh

This is a journalistic account of the proof of Fermat's theorem, that states that there is no whole number solution for aN+bN =cN for N>2. The theorem was unproved for 350 years, after Pierre Fermat noted that he had a marvelous proof that the margin of the book he was writing in could not contain. Andrew Wiles of Princeton's math department finally proved it using very modern math, while proving something called the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture. I enjoyed reading the history of the theorem, and Singh is a very good story teller. I had no clue about the mathematics involved, and could not even look up some of the terms in my reference books. ( )

This was the book that really got me excited about popular science writing. A classic, beautifully done. ( )

It seems to be quite hard to write a decent popular-maths book - or, at least, that would explain why I haven't found many.

This is definitely one of the few, though. Singh quickly establishes the background of the problem, then introduces the reader to Fermat. From this point, we go chronologically through the various attempts to prove (or disprove) it, explaining each new technique as it appears. A small number of light proofs are scattered through the text (I do like a book with appendices), which provide a pleasant diversion.

On the whole, it works well, though it understandably begins to be a bit vague on the mechanisms by the end. Keeps the interest up, though, and doesn't drag at all.