How to Solve Simultaneous Equations over Complex Numbers?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Diophantus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Simultaneous equations
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a system of simultaneous equations over the complex numbers, specifically focusing on a set of four equations involving three variables (x, y, z). Participants explore various methods and approaches to find solutions, including the use of symmetry, resultants, and geometric interpretations.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks solutions to a system of equations and mentions calculating a resultant as a necessary condition for solutions.
  • Another participant suggests leveraging the symmetry among the variables to simplify the problem.
  • A participant points out that having four equations with three unknowns generally implies there may not be a solution, although the specific equations could still be solvable.
  • It is noted that the equations may have a geometric interpretation that could aid in finding solutions.
  • One participant expresses a need to find singular points of the surface defined by the first equation, which are related to the equations of the derivatives.
  • There is a discussion about the computation of the resultant, with one participant clarifying their approach differs from the standard definition.
  • A participant shares results obtained using Maple software, listing several potential solutions derived from the equations.
  • Another participant mentions substituting their resultant into the first equation, yielding a new expression that appears promising but lacks immediate utility.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the methods to approach the problem, with no consensus reached on a definitive solution or strategy. Some participants agree on the potential of symmetry, while others raise concerns about the solvability of the system.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved mathematical steps and dependencies on the definitions of terms like "resultant." The discussion reflects a range of assumptions and interpretations regarding the equations and their solutions.

Diophantus
Messages
69
Reaction score
0
I am trying to find the solutions to the following system over the complex numbers: [tex]x^4 + y^4 + z^4 +4xyz - 4x^2 - 4y^2 - 4z^2 +5 =0[/tex]
[tex]4x^3 + 4yz - 8x =0[/tex]
[tex]4y^3 + 4xz - 8y =0[/tex]
[tex]4z^3 + 4xy - 8z =0[/tex]I calculated the resultant:

[tex]xyz - 2x^2 - 2y^2 - 2z^2 +5[/tex]

which would give a necessary condition for solutions but I've been messing about for hours and I still can't see how to proceed.

Any suggestions?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Can you take advantage of the symmetry among the variables?
 
You have 4 equations with 3 unknowns. In general there won't be a solution (although your particular equations could be solvable).

Also the third equation doesn't look right, shouldn't the middle term be 4xz?
 
Seems like x=y=z=1 is a solution.
 
Code:
Also the third equation doesn't look right, shouldn't the middle term be 4xz?

Indeed you are right.

So the symmetry implies that if (a,b,c) is asloution then so are (a,c,b) , (b,a,c) , (b,c,a) , (c,a,b) , and (c,b,a).

I'm really looking for a way of obtaining the whole solution set. I have done similar problems in the past by getting a resultant doing some substitution in order to get a list of candidates (containing all solutions) which can then be chencked.
 
It appears that your last three equations are partial derivatives of the first equation.
I suspect a geometric interpretation might help guide you to the solution.
 
Sorry I should have been more honest from the outset. I'm trying to find the singular points of the surface defined in the top equation. These points are exactly the points on the surface which satisfy the equations of the derivatives. I didn't say that before because I thought it would confuse matters. In effect the geometric problem was the hard problem which was supposed to be made easier by translating it into an algerbaic one.
 
Are you allowed to ask magma? :wink:


Your computation of resultant is unfamiliar to me -- the one I know takes two polynomials and a variable as input, and outputs a single polynomial that does not contain the given variable. So I don't know what you computed.
 
The 'resultant' I was using is not technically the same as the usual definition I believe. What I was doing was setting:

[tex]4f - f_x - f_y - f_z = 0[/tex]

which gives a necessary condition for the solutions of the four equations.

Not familiar with magma I'm afraid. The important thing is that I really need to be able to know how to do it but if you could generate the solution set using magma then I guess it would be, helpful in the sense of knowing what we are looking for.
 
  • #10
Maple:
Code:
> eq:={x^4+y^4+z^4+4*x*y*z-4*x^2-4*y^2-4*z^2+5=0, 4*x^3+4*y*z-8*x=0, 4*y^3+4*z*x-8*y=0, 4*z^3+4*x*y-8*z=0};

          4    4    4                2      2      2
  eq := {x  + y  + z  + 4 x y z - 4 x  - 4 y  - 4 z  + 5 = 0,

           3                       3
        4 x  + 4 y z - 8 x = 0, 4 y  + 4 z x - 8 y = 0,

           3
        4 z  + 4 x y - 8 z = 0}

> solve(eq,{x,y,z});

  {z = 1, y = 1, x = 1}, {z = -1, y = 1, x = -1},

        {z = -1, x = 1, y = -1}, {z = 1, x = -1, y = -1}

The surfaces [ plotted with implicitplot3d ] look interesting... but weren't immediately suggestive of a strategy... with the exception of the obvious symmetry in the variables.
 
  • #11
Thanks robphy, I'll ponder it a bit longer and report my progess later.
 
  • #12
I sustituted my 'resultant' into the first equation to get:

[tex](x^2 + 5)(x^2 - 1) + (y^2 + 5)(y^2 - 1) + (z^2 + 5)(z^2 - 1) = 0[/tex]

which looks quite nice but I can't see any immediate use.

I also used the 'resultant' to get:

[tex]x = \frac{yz}{4} \pm \frac{1}{4}\sqrt{40 - 16x^2 - 16z^2 + y^2 z^2}[/tex]

Alas though substituing into any of the original equations just gives a mess.
 
  • #13
I'm still stuck. Anyone?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K