A Clarification of Mihăilescu's Theorem (Catalan's Conjecture)

AI Thread Summary
Mihăilescu's theorem confirms that Catalan's conjecture holds true, with the only natural number solution to the equation x^a - y^b = 1 being x=3, a=2, y=2, and b=3. The discussion raises questions about whether Mihăilescu's theorem implies that no other pairs of powers can equal 1 under different conditions. It seeks clarification on whether specific restrictions apply to the integers involved, such as requiring x or y to be prime or if only the conditions x, y > 0 and a, b > 1 are necessary. The conversation references Wikipedia for a more detailed explanation of these restrictions. Understanding these nuances is crucial for comprehending the broader implications of Mihăilescu's theorem.
e2m2a
Messages
354
Reaction score
13
TL;DR Summary
I understand Catalan's conjecture was proven by Preda V. Mihăilescu in 2002. However, I am not sure if it is proved for only certain conditions.
Mihăilescu's theorem proves that Catalan's conjecture is true. That is for x^a - y^b = 1, the only possible solution in naturual numbers for this equation is x=3, a=2, y=2, b=3. What is not clear to me is this. Does Mihăilescu's theorem prove that the difference between any other two powers (not the Catalan expression) will never be equal to 1 but only within certain restrictions? Another words, are there conditions that restrict x or y have to be both prime integers or just one of them must be a prime integer or does a or b have to be both prime integers or just one of them must be a prime integer for Mihăilescu's theorem to be true? Or is the only condition necessary is that x,y >0 and a.b >1?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
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...
Back
Top