Fermat's last theorum was solved eh?

Also how do you spell theorum because google put a red line under my spelling.

It was solved by "Wayne" with huge help from the groundwork done by an enigmatic Japanese mathematician who ended up killing himself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ym...

Yutaka Taniyama that is the name of the ill-starred Japanese mathematician.

Oh! Theorem!

Ah "Wayne" is <Ken Ribet>

This is actually a much more concise account of the discovery in which Ken (Wayne) describes how he cracked it.

Oh no it was <Andrew Weil> who figured out the final connection proving Fermat's last theorem.

Good evening.

On this:

< MissScarlett: <Final question- how do we know which calendar was used for the dates in the Schachblatter?> I notice that in a few places, Amelung give both dates, with the Gregorian in brackets. Fortunately, because of the text-heavy nature of the articles, there aren't a large number of games involved. It will be problematic when a game is dated just by the month.>

I am wondering what your preference might be in these cases?

1. Enter the month given

2. Leave the month field blank

<MissScarlett> Good thinking. I am almost finished changing dates on the Baltische Schachblatter Julian-Gregorian conversions, up to Heft 7 now.Turns out not so many games had already been uploaded, but I changed those that had been to <Gregorian>.

I transcribed and uploaded many other scores. After I do Heft 8 then all the scores (I could read) from the periodical will be in our database.

So far there are around half a dozen scores that have some kind of mistake in them to the extent that I couldn't figure out what the original moves were.

I ran across so few scores that listed only the month that I decided to just leave the month as it is. As you pointed out earlier, sometimes (but rarely) the Julian and Gregorian is given.

In all other cases I converted the scores to Gregorian.

All of the work I did so far is listed in "Heft collections" at the top of my forum. After all the hefting has been done, I will do a final check on all the Baltische games.

In a (very rare) error, you spoiled your <I find ignoring difficult questions always works> strategy, because it just prompted me to post another unnecessarily long, gusting up to unnecessary, post in your forum.

<MissScarlett>

You mean that if we don't know the year the game was actually played, that we should list the year in which the game score was published?

What if the score was published 100 years after the game was played?

It would be a rare case, but not impossible. In such a case, would we not try to find other clues as to when the game was most likely played? Here, the "circa" function would be particularly helpful. There might be other dating clues to work from, such as knowledge of what city the player was in over which span of years, for example.

Ideally, no, practically, yes.

<In such a case, would we not try to find other clues as to when the game was most likely played? Here, the "circa" function would be particularly helpful. >

An alternative or additional idea would be to allow a <?> mark to be inserted next to the date field. The two could be used interchangeably, but the <?> might be a superior indication of a lack of information.

<I suggest he could add a separate function where a <c> or <?> could be appended to the date field in the game header>

Described as "Played by Capablanca at Buenos Ayres against B.H Villegus and Dr Carrauza in consultation."

I believe both names are misprinted and this game is from 1911 with Benito Higinio Villegas and Leopoldo Carranza.

[Event "Exhibition Game"]
[Site "Buenos Aires ARG"]
[Date "1911.??.??"]
[EventDate "1911.??.??"]
[Round "1"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Jose Raul Capablanca"]
[Black "Benito Higinio Villegas / Leopoldo Carranza"] [ECO "C30"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[Source "Morpeth Herald - Friday 5th April 1912"]