Can all primes of the form 4n + 1 be written as the sum of two squares?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Frillth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Squares Sum
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving a theorem related to primes of the form 4n + 1 and their representation as sums of two squares. The original poster is exploring the conditions under which an odd prime divides the sum of two squares, specifically focusing on the implications of the GCD of two integers being 1.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to connect the properties of primes of the form 4n + 3 with their inability to be expressed as sums of two squares. They express uncertainty about the validity of this connection and seek guidance on how to approach the proof.
  • Participants suggest examining the problem using modular arithmetic, specifically mod 4, and propose case work to derive contradictions based on the properties of primes.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the proofs referenced by the original poster, particularly regarding the necessity of divisors being sums of squares.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing hints and exploring different lines of reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding modular arithmetic and the characteristics of sums of squares, but there is still a lack of consensus on the best approach to prove the original theorem.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses confusion about certain proofs and concepts, such as infinite descent, indicating a potential gap in foundational knowledge that may affect their understanding of the problem.

Frillth
Messages
77
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I must prove the theorem that if the GCD of a and b is 1, and if p is an odd prime which divides a^2 + b^2, p is of the form 4n + 1.

Homework Equations



I have seen two proofs that I think might be helpful.

1. If a and b are relatively prime then every factor of a^2 + b^2 is a sum of two squares.
2. Every prime of the form 4n + 1 is a sum of two squares.

I got these from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proofs_of_Fermat's_theorem_on_sums_of_two_squares

The Attempt at a Solution



I realize now that if I can prove that a prime of the form 4n + 3 cannot be written as the sum of two primes, then I can prove the original theorem. I'm not sure if this is true, however, or how to prove it if it is. If it is not true, I have no idea where to start looking for help. Does anybody have an idea?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hints:
1. look at things in mod 4.

2. case works, suppose p=4n+3, use proofs 1 you posted to get contradiction.
 
I don't understand how I can look at things in mod 4 to help me out. I also don't know how to to use the proofs to show that p = 4n + 3 can't be a divisor.
 
more hints:
look at x^2 mod 4, x^2 must be congruent to either 1 or 0 mod 4.

now look at a^2 + b^2 mod 4, they must be equivalent to 2 or 1 mod 4 (0 is impossible since a,b are relatively prime)

now, you should be able to proceed, assume p=4n+3 which is -1 mod 4.
 
OK, I understand now why 4n + 3 cannot be a sum of squares. I'm not sure I understand, however, why the wikipedia proof for why the sum of squares must have divisors that are sums of squares. I have never even heard of infinite descent proofs before, so I'm wondering if there's a different way that I'm supposed to do this.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K