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

Gaussian Integers and Pythagorean Triplets

  1. Sep 22, 2007 #1
    It is well known that 4n(n+1) + 1 is a square if n is an integer but if n is a Gaussian integer i.e., 4n(n+1) + 1 = A + Bi, then the norm (A^2 + B^2) is always a square! The proof is quite easy since A = u^2 - v^2 and B = 2uv.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 23, 2007 #2
    4n(n+1)+1 =(2n+1)^2, but it can not equal A+Bi, because you are not considering the imaginary part, are you?

    If, instead, we take the form Z=A+Bi, and look at (2Z+1)^2, what do we do now?
     
  4. Sep 23, 2007 #3
    If n=Z = 1+2i for example
    [tex]4*(1+2i)*(2+2i) + 1 = -7+24i = (3+4i)^2 = (2Z+1)^2 = (2A+1 +2Bi)^2)[/tex]
    [tex]-7 = (2A+1)^2 - (2B)^2 = u^2 - v^2[/tex]
    [tex] 24 = 2(2A+1)(2B) = 2uv[/tex]
    So we have the x and y of the Pathagorean triple: (7*7 + 24*24 = 25*25)
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2007
  5. Sep 23, 2007 #4
    First let Z* = conjugate of Z, then if (2Z+1)=A+Bi, we have (2Z*+1)(2Z+1) =A^2 +B^2
    This then results in (2a+1)^2 + b^2 = A^2+B^2, which is what is expected. But it does not make (2Z+1)(2Z*+1) a square.

    You say, quote: The proof is quite easy since A = u^2 - v^2 and B = 2uv.

    You introduce the above, in the second sentence, which is what is required to show that A^2+B^2 =(u^2+v^2)^2. But it does not relate to (2Z+1)^2, as introduced in the first sentence.

    Anyway, since with sentence 2 you have created the Pythagorian triples, we need only say for example that since 3^2+4^2 = 5^2, the Gaussian integer 3+4i has a square as its norm.
     
  6. Sep 24, 2007 #5
    You must multiply 4*Z*(Z+1) and add 1 to get a square that I am talking about.
    However any Gaussian integer squared is of the form A+Bi where A= u^2 - v^2 and B = 2uv since I read that the norm of a product of two complex numbers is the product of their norms. So yes it is possible to have two squares that do not sum to a square but that is not possible for the A and B where A+Bi is the square of a Gaussian integer.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2007
  7. Sep 24, 2007 #6
    The last couple of posts are troubling at first glance. Of course the product of two conjugates equals A^2 + B^2 but here that is of the form A' = A^2 + B^2 and B' =0 so the norm is (A^2+B^2)^2 which what is to be expected. What my first post states is that 4Z(Z+1)+1 = (2Z+1)^2 = A + Bi where A = u^2 + v^2 and B = 2uv which I showed in a later post to be true. The product of two conjugates are also of the form A' = u^2+v^2 abd B' = 2uv since this is a trival case where v = 0.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2007
  8. Sep 24, 2007 #7
    O.K., you have (a+bi)^2 = a^2-b^2 +2abi. Thus N(a+bi)^2 =(a^2-b^2)^2+(2ab)^2 = (A^2+b^2)^2.

    So then you are saying (2Z+1)^2 = A+Bi is such that (2Z*+1)^2(2Z+1)^2 = A^2 +B^2.

    I guess I was confused about how you were writing that up.
     
  9. Sep 24, 2007 #8
    I guess we confused each other. I went back and corrected my last post since A = u^2-v^2 not u^2+v^2; but I don't think I ever said anything about the product of the squares of two conjugates except that by inference they too are of the form A+Bi where A = u^2-v^2 and B =2uv.
     
  10. Sep 24, 2007 #9
    It is easily shown that all Gaussian integers that are squares are of the form A+Bi where A=u^2-v^2 and B = -2uv. Therefore all Gaussian integers that are squares have a square norm. But not all Gausian integers that have a square norm are squares since 3 is not a Guassian square but has a square norm and 3*Z^2 has a square norm but likewise is not a square. Is it true that all Gaussian integers that have a square norm are either a Gaussian square or a product of a Gaussian square and an integer which is not a Gaussian square?
    Thanks for reply
    Edit, I forgot to consider the Gaussian units, "i" is not a Gaussian square so I have to amend my question. Are only the only Gaussian integers that have a square norm either a Gaussian square or the product of i and or an integer and a Gaussian square?
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2007
  11. Sep 25, 2007 #10
    I think the first problem here was The Axiom of Symbolic Stability. It is well known that 4n(n+1) + 1 is a square if n is an integer but if n is a Gaussian integer i.e., 4n(n+1) + 1 = A + Bi, then the norm (A^2 + B^2) is always a square! The proof is quite easy since A = u^2 - v^2 and B = 2uv. I failed to recognize that A+Bi was the same as u+vi.

    I also was considering, wrongly, a Gaussian integer to be only those that decomposed over the imaginary. I had not considered 3, for example. With the exception of 2 the only primes that will decompose are those congruent to 1 Mod 4. Thus the Pythagorian triples are built up from 5, 13, 17, etc. For example 5 =(1+2i)(1-2i) =(2+i)(2-i). Or products of primes==1 Mod 4 such as: 65 = 8^2+1^1 = 7^2+4^2. (Which can be done in two distinct ways.) However, 3 can be present only in a squared form, such as: (15)^2=9^2+12^2.

    Without going into the question of a Gaussain square, I think you are right. As for 2, (1+i) and (1-i) and not distinct primes since (-i)(1+i) = (1-i), so they differ only by a unit.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2007
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Similar Discussions: Gaussian Integers and Pythagorean Triplets
  1. Pythagorean triplets (Replies: 14)

Loading...