Talk:Fermat's Last Theorem in fiction

Merge into Fermat's Last Theorem?
Should this be merged into Fermat's Last Theorem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.35.10 (talk) 19:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That is where the material used to be, but it was made into a separate article. See also Talk:Fermat's last theorem. --Lambiam 03:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Missing Story
Years ago I recall reading a story (I think it was in Asimov) about Fermat's Last Theorem. The protagonist was supposed to have come up with a solution and some time traveling college students of the future were there to find out how he did it. Due to some particle leakage in their equipment, the protagonist started to have flashes of the future, which ended up helping him meet and couple with a fellow mathematician, and eventually to IIRC solve the theorem, with some minor interaction with the time travelers (something along the lines of "why are you following me?" and "oh no, our special futury viewoscope is leaking hallucinogenic future particles").

Anyone have any clue what I am talking about? -- Shoone (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Add Stieg Larsson's Millennium Trilogy?
Lisbeth Salander, one of the protagonists in the book series solves Fermats Theorem in the second book of the trilogy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lzandman (talk • contribs) 00:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Rename to "Fermat's Last Theorem in popular culture"?
Should this article be renamed to "Fermat's Last Theorem in popular culture"?

Looking at the current list of entries, it may be more appropriate to use the term "popular culture" to refer to media such as songs, play, games, etc.

I am quite new to editing Wikipedia entries so I would welcome any feedback. Many thanks, Kieran Olearykieran (talk) 00:48, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

"Modular forms and elliptic curves"
I do not bet on anything, but what odds would one get, when claiming that the mentioned whole phrase, cited in non-scientific, popular environment, would not refer to Wiles' proof? I think the target were not even FLT itself, possibly staying unbeknownst in the crowd, but about the methods relevant in the proof. So, adhering to the WP rules, I see not the slightest chance to have this trivia in the article. This is not fully reasonable to my measures, but whatever, no hard feelings on my side. Purgy (talk) 09:58, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * It looks more like a reference to the modularity theorem, not FLT. We would need the author of those lyrics, or someone closely associated, to confirm the connection, otherwise putting into the article amounts to original research. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No, we would need a reliable source (not necessarily connected with the author) to make the connection. And then we can put that source inside a nice pair of tags at the end of the bullet point, and all will be well. --JBL (talk) 14:30, 8 October 2018 (UTC)