Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Conjecture on triangular numbers T(n)

  1. Jan 18, 2008 #1
    Let a triangular number T(n) = n*(n+1)/2 be factored into the product A*B with A less or equal to B.
    Let gcd(x,y) be the greatest common divisor of x and y
    For each of pair (A,B) define C,D,E,F as follows

    C = (gcd(A,n+1))^2,
    D = 2*(gcd(B,n))^2,
    E = 2*(gcd(A,n))^2,
    F = (gcd(B,n+1))^2.

    As an example.
    Let n = 36 then T(n) = 666 which can be factored into 6 distinct pairs A,B. The
    six sets (A,B,C,D,E,F) are as follows

    1. (1,666,1,648, 1369,2)
    2. (2,333,1,162,1369,8)
    3. (3,222,1,72,1369,18)
    4. (6,111,1,18,1369,72)
    5. (9,74,1,8,1369,162)
    6. (18,37,1,2,1369,648)

    My conjecture is that the products (A+Ct)*(B+Dt) and (A+Et)*(B+Ft) are each triangular numbers (= T(r) = r(r+1))/2) for all integer t. Also, the above example gave a interesting result in that when the 12 results for r (= the integer part of the square root of 2T(r)) are sorted by value the difference between adjacent r values when t = 1 was one of the even factors of 666. It would seem to me that the easiest way to prove this conjecture would be to derive and prove a formula for r. I will give the corresponding r values below for t = 1
    1. 72,110
    2. 54,184
    3. 48,258
    4. 42,480
    5. 40,702
    6. 38,1368

    Also I found that r follows an arithmetic series as t varies, so it is important to find the pattern for the above values, since the difference between them and 36 is the difference value of the arithmetic series. Anyone see a pattern?
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2008
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 19, 2008 #2
    just a silly question related with you are posting here: is there triangular prime numbers?

    I think should be but in a quick search I didn't find an example
  4. Jan 20, 2008 #3
    A formula can be derived from the (positive) solution of r^2 + r - 2*T(r) = 0, which is
    [tex]r = {{\sqrt {1 + 8 T(r)} - 1} \over 2}}[/tex]
    But I don't see how this helps to prove your conjecture.
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2008
  5. Jan 20, 2008 #4


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    As stated in the original post, any triangular number can be writen in the form n(n+1)/2. Since one of either n or n+1 must be even, that is the product of positive integers. The only way it could be prime is if one of those numbers is 1: if n= 1, then 1(2)/2= 1 which is not a prime number. If (n+1)/2= 1, then n+1= 2 so n= 1 again.

    No, there are no prime triangular numbers.
  6. Jan 20, 2008 #5

    Yes, this is obvious, I didn't see the most obvious thing !!
  7. Jan 20, 2008 #6
    Actually, T(2)=3 is prime... but the reasoning holds for higher n.
  8. Jan 20, 2008 #7
    Progress report

    While only one prime, 3, can be represented as a triangular number, all primes other than 3 can be represented as n(n+1)/2 -i where i is a positive integer less than n in one and only one way, and as another posted noted triangular numbers and square numbers are related since 8T(n) + 1 = (2n+1)^2.

    Progress report: my conjecture does indeed hold where n is even and A is a factor of n other than n. First of all I forgot to note that my formula for C,D,E,F was meant only for the case where n is even, if n is odd then make the substitution n' = -(n+1) and the formula also works. I still am working on the general conjecture.

    Proof of my simplified conjecture follows:

    The new values of A,B,C,D,E, and F can now be expressed as

    1A. A,B,1,2*(n/2A)^2,2*A^2,(n+1)^2

    The second conjectured result follows directly from the relation

    [tex]T_{(n + 2A(n+1)t)} = (A +2t*(A^2))*(B+ t*(n+1)^2)[/tex]

    The first conjectured result (using C and D) follows directly from the relation

    [tex]T_{(n + nt/A)} = (A + t)*(B + 2t*(n/2A)^2)[/tex]

    The above relations follow directly by expansion of both sides and comparison of like terms after making the substitution n(n+1)/2 = AB

    Although the above is presumably dealing with integers only, I think the same relationship hold for n and A being within the field of rationals or within the complex number field as long as A,B,C,D,E,and F are defined as in line 1A. In this case the conditions that n is odd or that A is a factor of n are not necessary as long as T(n) is defined as n(n+1)/2 regardless of the nature of n.

    I will concentrate on A = a factor of n+1 next
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2008
  9. Jan 22, 2008 #8
    You conjecture is true for A = n/2 and B = n+1, when n = even number, for the expression (A+Dt)(B+Ct)

    as gcd(n,n+1) = 1, then C = 1 and D = 2

    [tex](A+Dt)(B+Ct) = (n/2 + t)(n+1 + 2t) = \frac{[n+2t]*[(n+2t)+1]}{2}[/tex]

    But (A+Et)(B+Ft) is not a triangular number for all t

    gcd(A,n) = n/2 ==> [tex]2[gcd(A,n)]^2 = \frac{n^2}{2}[/tex] ==>

    ==> [tex]A+Et = \frac{n + n^2t}{2}[/tex]

    gcd(B,n+1) = n+1 ==> [tex]gcd(B,n+1)^2 = (n+1)^2[/tex] ==>

    ==> [tex]B+Ft = n + 1 + (n+1)^2t = n + n^2t + (2nt + t + 1)[/tex]

    showing that (A+Et)(B+Ft) is triangular if and ony if t = 0
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  10. Jan 22, 2008 #9
    We have to test when A is not n/2, say A = kx and B = wy
  11. Jan 22, 2008 #10
    write A = kx and B = wy

    its easy to see that if k divides n/2 and x not, then x divides n+1
    same argument for B factors

    supose we take A and B such that k divides n/2, x does not, w divides n+1, y does not, so n/2 = ky and n+1 = xw ==> 2ky + 1 = xw

    gcd(A,n+1) = x ==> C = x^2
    gcd(B,n) = y ==> D = 2y^2
    gcd(A,n) = k ==> 2k^2
    gcd(B,n+1) = w ==> w^2

    now we have to find a r(r+1)/2 form
  12. Jan 22, 2008 #11
    You didn't look far enough!
    [tex](A + Et)*(B+Ft) = \frac{n+n^2t}{2} *(n+n^2t +2nt + t + 1)[/tex]

    [tex] = \frac{n+n^{2}t}{2}*((n+n^{2}t+ nt+1) + nt + t) [/tex]

    [tex] = \frac{n +n^{2}t +nt}{2}*(n+n^{2}t + nt + 1)[/tex]

    [tex] = T_{n + n^{2}t +nt}[/tex]

    What's more important you can let A be any integer, rational or complex number and still the product
    (A+Et)*(B+Ft) = m(m+1)/2 where T(n) = A*B is a triangular number and E and F are defined as in line 1A of my January 20 post and m = n + 2A(n+1)t
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2008
  13. Jan 22, 2008 #12
    Thanks that is helpful, I will use these new terms in my next response.
  14. Jan 22, 2008 #13
    For (A+Ct)*(B + Dt); r = n+2xyt
    by symmetry
    For (A+Et)*(B+Ft); r = n+2wkt
  15. Jan 23, 2008 #14
    Now put k = (a^n)/2, y = 1/b^n, x = 1/b^n and w = c^n then my equations become

    T(2ky + 2xyt) = (kx +tx^2)*(wy+2ty^2)

    T(2ky +2kwt) = (ky +2tk^2)*(wy+tw^2)

    Is it true that for n>2 this can have no solution except a = 0 since the requirement that 2ky + 1 = wx can not be met due to Fermat's theorm?
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2008
  16. Jan 23, 2008 #15
    This is not correct, you cannot put "nt" in the other side like this, and what about "t"?
  17. Jan 23, 2008 #16
    (n+n^2t)*(nt+t)=nt*(1+nt)*(n+1) = nt*(n + n^2t + nt + 1) so I was right to express it that way. Sorry for not showing all steps but I had trouble with my latex expressions.
  18. Jan 23, 2008 #17
    we have to write (A+Et)*(B+Ft) in the r(r+1)/2 form, right?

    if [tex]A+Et = \frac{n + n^2t}{2}[/tex], then [tex]n + n^2t[/tex] can be called "r"

    as[tex]B+Ft = n + (n+1)^2t + 1[/tex], and [tex]n + n^2t \neq n + (n+1)^2t[/tex], I can NOT write the product (A+Et)*(B+Ft) in the r(r+1)/2 form, since [tex] n + (n+1)^2t [/tex] is not "r",

    try to find a concrete counter example proving that (A+Et)*(B+Ft) is triangular for t > 0, I may be mistaken, but I believe that there is not such example.
  19. Jan 24, 2008 #18
    I just finished showing that r = n + n^2t + nt . You are under the false impression that r must equal (A+Et) or (B+Ft) but all I said was that r(r+1)/2 = (A+Et)*(B+Ft)
    In the example you chose r = n+n^2t +nt . Work it out and see for yourself.
  20. Jan 25, 2008 #19
    Sorry, my big mistake, pure laziness !!! Of course you're right
  21. Jan 29, 2008 #20
    Let T(r) = r(r+1)/2
    I have used this format as follows
    Let n = 2ab and n+1 = cd then the following 4 equations hold for all t
    T(n + 2act) = ac(b+ct)(d + 2at)
    T(n + 2adt) = ad(b+dt)(c + 2at)
    T(n + 2bct) = bc(a+ct)(d + 2bt)
    T(n + 2bdt) = bd(a+dt)(c + 2bt)

    Knowing that T(n) + T(n+1) = (n+1)^2, I tried letting a=c=1, b = x^n/y^n and c = z^n/y^n in the above formulas and got

    (z^n/y^n)^2 = z^n(z^n + y^n + x^n)/2y^(2n) each time by choosing t = 1/2ac etc.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook