# Manny's Reviews > Flickan Som Lekte Med Elden

Flickan Som Lekte Med Elden (Millenium, #2)

by Stieg Larsson

by Stieg Larsson

Manny's review

bookshelves: swedish-and-norwegian, too-sexy-for-maiden-aunts, older-women-younger-men

Sep 07, 11

bookshelves: swedish-and-norwegian, too-sexy-for-maiden-aunts, older-women-younger-men

Read in November, 2008, read count: 1

Unfortunately not as good as

Start geek-rant: as a former mathematician, I was annoyed by his sloppiness concerning Fermat's Last Theorem. To start off with, he misquotes it several times. And the whole idea that Lisbeth is able to solve it on her own in just a few months, with no formal mathematical training, is cheap. If this were the only thing wrong, it wouldn't of course matter very much. But it's more a symptom of the lack of care he is displaying... the whole book has an unfinished feel to it.

But, before I get too critical, I must admit that I couldn't put it down, and that the main characters, especially Lisbeth, are wonderful creations. I'm sure I'll read the third volume soon.

*Män som Hatar Kvinnor*. He has gone too far, and Lisbeth Salander is no longer a fully credible person; also, the puzzle isn't as satisfying as in the first one.Start geek-rant: as a former mathematician, I was annoyed by his sloppiness concerning Fermat's Last Theorem. To start off with, he misquotes it several times. And the whole idea that Lisbeth is able to solve it on her own in just a few months, with no formal mathematical training, is cheap. If this were the only thing wrong, it wouldn't of course matter very much. But it's more a symptom of the lack of care he is displaying... the whole book has an unfinished feel to it.

But, before I get too critical, I must admit that I couldn't put it down, and that the main characters, especially Lisbeth, are wonderful creations. I'm sure I'll read the third volume soon.

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read

sign in »
*Flickan Som Lekte Med Elden*.## Reading Progress

11/13/2008 | page 5 | |||

11/17/2008 | page 110 | "Not as good as "Män som hatar kvinnor", but still quite compulsive..." |

## Comments (showing 1-20)

date
newest »

Larsson's not much of a meteorologist, either. :-) But what skill he lacks in science and math he makes up for in storytelling, I think.

If I am correct Fermat's Therem states that there is no solution for the equation a(p)n + b(p)n = c(p)n for n>2. Larsson quotes the eqation a(p)3 + bp)3 = c(p)3. This is not quite correct but Lisbeth would have won the prize if she had prooved her version before Wiles.

*Georg wrote: "If I am correct Fermat's Therem states that there is no solution for the equation a(p)n + b(p)n = c(p)n for n>2. Larsson quotes the eqation a(p)3 + bp)3 = c(p)3. This is not quite correct but Lisbeth would have won the prize if she had prooved her version before Wiles."*

"Not quite correct" is putting it mildly. If Larsson had bothered to read the first two paragraphs of the Wikipedia article, he would have found the following:

Fermat left no proof of the conjecture for all n, but he did prove the special case n = 4. This reduced the problem to proving the theorem for exponents n that are odd prime numbers. Over the next two centuries (1637–1839), the conjecture was proven for only the primes 3, 5, and 7.So the case for n=3, which is what Lisbeth proves, had been solved over 150 years earlier. Luckily, she gets shot in the head before she can embarrass herself.

*Luckily, she gets shot in the head before she can embarrass herself.*

That is incredibly funny and I now have to Clean.My.Screen

When Wiles's proof was announced, there was a rumor floating around Cambridge that Sharon Stone had emailed him and asked him out for a date. She said she'd always been really interested in Fermat's last theorem. It's conceivably not a hoax, since she's known to be vain about her high IQ.

OK, it's not as good as rising from your grave, but none the less.

OK, it's not as good as rising from your grave, but none the less.

Rising from your grave isn't bad. But turning water into wine: I still look for the book to teach me that.

Thank you Carlo! As you've no doubt already heard from many people, the third book is much better than the second, so don't give up yet :)

Yeah, the second book was sort of awful. The third book was better, but not by much - I thought the 2nd and 3rd books were really like one giant book split up, and it might've been better if they were edited down to one book.

Well, one never entirely ceases, but it's possible to get so seriously out of practice that your claim becomes dubious...

I used to get a bit annoyed with journalists who would describe somebody as the ex-Israeli President.

every writer has shortcomings in thier research BUT for what he covers, if he can pull you in, make you believe in the story, then generally it's a good story. Lisbeths abilities, were the tools to make the story believable (I'm referring to her math ability), good review though.

I feel the need to point out that this book was published after Larson died, he very well may have been sloppy with the facts in his last draft because he was waiting for more help on research. I would actually blame the publishers for this one.

My assumption is that she may well have had a flash of insight that wouldn't have held up to someone else challenging her thesis. How many other brilliant mathematicians have excitedly done the exact same thing, checked and rechecked their conclusions, only for someone else to poke a glaring hole in it?

Agree in the fact that the puzzle isn't as satisfying. I'm in the middle of Hornet's Nest now and hoping that this one picks up. Not too hopeful though since I seem to be growing more irritated with the whole plot line concerning her father.

message 20:by ☯Bettie☯ (new) - rated it4stars