MHB At which p-adic fields does the equation have no rational solution?

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields Rational
AI Thread Summary
The equation $3x^2 + 5y^2 - 7z^2 = 0$ has been shown to lack non-trivial solutions in $\mathbb{Q}$, particularly verified through the case of $p=3$. To determine at which p-adic fields it has no rational solution, the Hilbert symbol $\left( \frac{3}{7}, \frac{5}{7} \right)_p$ must be computed for various primes. The discussion emphasizes the importance of checking primes $p=3, 5, 7, \infty$ for potential solutions. Concerns were raised regarding the understanding of the Hilbert symbol and alternative methods for larger primes.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hello! (Wave)I have to check if the equation $3x^2+5y^2-7z^2=0$ has a non-trivial solution in $\mathbb{Q}$. If it has, I have to find at least one. If it doesn't have, I have to find at which p-adic fields it has no rational solution.Theorem:

We suppose that $a,b,c \in \mathbb{Z}, (a,b)=(b,c)=(a,c)=1$.

$abc$ is square-free. Then, the equation $ax^2+by^2+cz^2=0$ has a non-trivial solution in $\mathbb{Q} \Leftrightarrow$



  1. $a,b,c$ do not have the same sign.
  2. $\forall p \in \mathbb{P} \setminus \{ 2 \}, p \mid a$, $\exists r \in \mathbb{Z}$ such that $b+r^2c \equiv 0 \pmod p$ and similar congruence for the primes $p \in \mathbb{P} \setminus \{ 2 \}$, for which $p \mid b$ or $p \mid c$.
  3. If $a,b,c$ are all odd, then there are two of $a,b,c$, so that their sum is divided by $4$.
  4. If $a$ even, then $b+c$ or $a+b+c$ is divisible by $8$.
    Similar, if $b$ or $c$ even.

The first sentence is satisfied.

For the second one:

$$p=3:$$

$$5+x^2(-7) \equiv 0 \pmod 3 \Rightarrow x^2 \equiv 2 \mod 3$$
$$\left ( \frac{2}{3} \right)=-1$$So, we see that the equation hasn't non-trivial solutions in $\mathbb{Q}$.

But.. how can we check at which p-adic fields the equation has no rational solution?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Divide out and write,
$$ \tfrac{3}{7}x^2 + \tfrac{5}{7}y^2 - z^2 = 0 $$
If there is a non-trivial solution in $\mathbb{Q}_p$ it means that the Hilbert symbol, $\left( \tfrac{3}{7},\tfrac{5}{7}\right)_p = 1$. Now you need to compute the Hilbert symbol for various primes $p$.

Now the Hilbert symbol can be multiplied through by a square without changing it. So we can clear denominators by multiplying through by $7^2$ and get $(21,35)_p=1$. Really the only primes you need to check are $p=3,5,7,\infty$. Do you understand why?
 
ThePerfectHacker said:
Divide out and write,
$$ \tfrac{3}{7}x^2 + \tfrac{5}{7}y^2 - z^2 = 0 $$
If there is a non-trivial solution in $\mathbb{Q}_p$ it means that the Hilbert symbol, $\left( \tfrac{3}{7},\tfrac{5}{7}\right)_p = 1$. Now you need to compute the Hilbert symbol for various primes $p$.

Now the Hilbert symbol can be multiplied through by a square without changing it. So we can clear denominators by multiplying through by $7^2$ and get $(21,35)_p=1$. Really the only primes you need to check are $p=3,5,7,\infty$. Do you understand why?

I haven't get taught the Hilbert symbol. (Worried) How else could we do this? (Thinking)
 
For $p=2,3,5,7$, we can write the congruence modulo $p$ and we can see if there is a solution or not.

But, what can we do for $p>7$ ? (Thinking)
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top