How to proof that a curve has no rational points

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the curve x² + y² - 3 = 0 has no rational points. Participants explore various methods and reasoning, including modular arithmetic and properties of squares, to tackle the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests starting by showing that a² + b² = 3c has no non-trivial solutions, proposing to investigate remainders modulo 4.
  • Another participant rewrites the problem in terms of rational points, expressing x and y as fractions and analyzing their squares modulo 4.
  • A proof is presented that squares of integers can only be 0 or 1 modulo 4, leading to a contradiction when analyzing the curve's equation.
  • Some participants point out that the proof only shows 3(qs)² ≡ 0 (mod 4) and not that it equals 0, suggesting a need for more precision in assumptions about the solutions.
  • There is a discussion about ensuring that the fractions representing the rational points are in reduced form, implying that at least one of the integers must be odd.
  • A later reply proposes considering the remainder of a sum of squares modulo 3 as a potential approach to show the lack of solutions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the proofs presented, with some suggesting refinements and others questioning the conclusions drawn. No consensus is reached on the validity of the proofs or the best approach to the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of assumptions regarding the integers involved in the rational points and the implications of working with reduced fractions. There are unresolved steps in the reasoning that could affect the conclusions drawn.

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
Writing the hint a different way:

If there is a rational point x = p/q, y= r/s, then (ps)2 + (qr)2 = 3(qs)2

Any square has remainder 0 or 1 mod 4 (consider (2k)2 and (2k+1)2)
 
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)
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
17K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
6K