How to proof that a curve has no rational points

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
6 replies · 7K views
AndreAo
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hello, I'm trying to do exercise number 20 from chapter 6 of this http://www.people.vcu.edu/~rhammack/BookOfProof/index.html, it asks to show that the curve x2 + y2 - 3 = 0 has no rational points. In the answer it has this tip: first show that a2 + b2 = 3c has no solutions, other than the trivial. To do this, investigate the remainders of a sum of squares (mod 4). After you’ve done this, prove that the only solution is indeed the trivial solution...
I'm in trouble with this part, how can I use the information from the tip?

Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hi AlephZero, thanks for rewriting it.
I'd like an opinion about the proof I did.

First I proved, at least I think, that [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4) or [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]1(mod 4).

Proof. Suppose x[itex]\in[/itex]Z. Then either x is even or x is odd. We consider theses cases separately.
Case 1: Suppose x is even. Then x = 2a, for some integer a. Squaring both sides, [itex]x^{2}[/itex] = 4 [itex]a^{2}[/itex]. By definition of divisibility, 4 | [itex]x^{2}[/itex]. Thus [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4).
Case 2: Suppose x is odd. Then x = 2b + 1, for some integer b. Squaring both sides, [itex]x^{2}[/itex] = 4[itex]b^{2}[/itex] + 4b + 1 = 4([itex]b^{2}[/itex] + b) + 1, which means [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]1(mod 4).
So, [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4) or [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]1(mod 4) as we wanted to proof.

The problem: Show that the curve [itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex] - 3 = 0 has no rational points.

Proof. Suppose for the sake of contradiction that there exists an rational point ([itex]x_{0}[/itex], [itex]y_{0}[/itex])[itex]\in[/itex][itex]Q^{2}[/itex]. Then we can write [itex]x_{0}[/itex] = [itex]\frac{p}{q}[/itex] and [itex]y_{0}[/itex]=[itex]\frac{r}{s}[/itex], with p,q,r,s[itex]\in[/itex]Q and q, s[itex]\neq[/itex] 0.
Replacing ([itex]x_{0}[/itex], [itex]y_{0}[/itex]) in the equation, [itex](ps)^{2}[/itex] + [itex](rq)^{2}[/itex] = 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex].

As we already proved [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4) or [itex]x^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]1(mod 4), it's easy to see that ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4) or ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]1(mod 4) or ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]2(mod 4).

Let's analyze the 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex]. We have two cases, qs is even or qs is odd.
Case 1: Suppose qs is even. Then qs = 2a, for some integer a. Then 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex]=3[itex](2a)^{2}[/itex]=12[itex]a^{2}[/itex]=4(3[itex]a^{2}[/itex]). So 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex] is divisible by 4, which means 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4).
Case 2: Suppose qs is odd. Then qs = 2b + 1, for some integer b. Then 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex]=3[itex](2b + 1)^{2}[/itex]= 12[itex]b^{2}[/itex]+12b+3 = 4(3[itex]b^{2}[/itex]+3b) + 3, which means 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]3(mod 4).
But we know that ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4) or ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]1(mod 4) or ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]2(mod 4), for any x,y [itex]\in[/itex] Z and that [itex](ps)^{2}[/itex] + [itex](rq)^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex](mod 4), so it must be the case that 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex] = 0, but this would only be true, if q or s equal zero, as we already said that q,s must be different from zero, we have a contradiction.
Therefore, it's not the case that exists a rational point in the curve [itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex] - 3 = 0.

Are these proofs right? What do you think?
Thanks.
 
AndreAo said:
But we know that ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4) or ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]1(mod 4) or ([itex]x^{2}[/itex] + [itex]y^{2}[/itex])[itex]\equiv[/itex]2(mod 4), for any x,y [itex]\in[/itex] Z and that [itex](ps)^{2}[/itex] + [itex](rq)^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex](mod 4), so it must be the case that 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex] = 0, but this would only be true, if q or s equal zero, as we already said that q,s must be different from zero, we have a contradiction.
You only proved [itex]3(qs)^{2}[/itex] = 0 (mod 4) and not [itex]3(qs)^{2}[/itex] = 0
 
willem2 said:
You only proved [itex]3(qs)^{2}[/itex] = 0 (mod 4) and not [itex]3(qs)^{2}[/itex] = 0

If might help to be a bit more precise about what you assume for a solution.

For example you can put both fractions over the same denominator and write
x = p/q, y = r/q
You can also cancel out any common factors between p q and r, so at least one of the three numbers must be odd...
 
AlephZero said:
If might help to be a bit more precise about what you assume for a solution.

For example you can put both fractions over the same denominator and write
x = p/q, y = r/q
You can also cancel out any common factors between p q and r, so at least one of the three numbers must be odd...
Thanks both!
I did some mistakes.
1. p,q,r,s [itex]\in[/itex]Z
AlephZero, as you suggest, I think I should have said that p,q have no common factors, and r,s have no common factors, so they're reduced fractions.

Until the point willem2 said, I think it's ok.
Then 3[itex](qs)^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4).
Thus, q or s have to be even. Suppose that q is even. Then p must be odd, as we said the fraction is already reduced. We know that [itex](ps)^{2}[/itex]+[itex](rq)^{2}[/itex][itex]\equiv[/itex]0(mod 4).
Then [itex](ps)^{2}[/itex]+[itex](rq)^{2}[/itex] = 4f, for some natural f.
Then [itex](ps)^{2}[/itex]+[itex](rq)^{2}[/itex] = 2(2f), which implies that both square numbers have to be even. We have rq even, as we suppose q to be even, so we must have s even, as p can't be. Until now we found that, p is odd, q is even, s is even, so r is odd.
I can't figure out any way to show a contradiction from this. Any ideas?

Thanks!
 
Actually I can prove this:
first show that a^2 + b^2 = 3c has no solutions, other than the trivial.

by considering the remainder of a sum of squares (mod 3)