Solving Radicals for A,B,C and D: 2^11-1

  • Thread starter Thread starter ramsey2879
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radicals
ramsey2879
Messages
841
Reaction score
3
I am weak in this topic but I am certain that the following is has a solution in integers A,B,C,D.

Find A,B,C and D as integers such that

(3*2^{.75} + 7*2^{.50} + 7*2^{.25} + 7)*(A*2^{.75} + B*2^{.50} + C*2^{.25} + D) = 2047*(2^{.75} + 2^{.50} +2^{.25} + 1).

I deduced this by studying the recursive sequence S^{n} = 3*S_{n-1} - 2*S_{n-2} That is {1,3,7,15,31, ...}

Thanks for any pointers.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ramsey2879 said:
I am weak in this topic but I am certain that the following is has a solution in integers A,B,C,D.

Find A,B,C and D as integers such that

(3*2^{.75} + 7*2^{.50} + 7*2^{.25} + 7)*(A*2^{.75} + B*2^{.50} + C*2^{.25} + D) = 2047*(2^{.75} + 2^{.50} +2^{.25} + 1).

I deduced this by studying the recursive sequence S^{n} = 3*S_{n-1} - 2*S_{n-2} That is {1,3,7,15,31, ...}

Thanks for any pointers.
Sorry but I couldn't do the math associated with the above problem. I will give an explanation of how I came up with it though. The recursive series S_{n} = (C+1)*S_{n-1} - C*S_n always has embeded within two intermeshed series A_{i} = S_{2i} and B_{i} = S_{2i +1} which both are of the form S_{n} = (C^{2} + 1)S_{n-1} - C^{2}S_{n-2}. In the above series if we let S_0 = 0 then S_i|S_{ni}. I correctly deduced that this works recursively both forwards and backwords i.e if we let C^{'} = C^{2} etc. Thus there should is a recursive series where C = 2^{.25} and S_{44} = 2047S_4 Indeed If S_0 = 0 and S_1 = 1 then S_4 = (2^{.75}+2^{.50}+2^{.25} + 1) and S_44 = 2047S_4.

S_{11} = 3*2^{.75} + 7*2^{.50} + 7^2^{.25} + 7 and of course S_11 divides S_44!
 
The numbers 1, 2^{1/4}, 2^{1/2}, 2^{3/4} are linearly independent over Q. Therefore, you can split your equation into four equations in four unknowns, and so you would usually expect to be able to apply linear algebra to compute the unique (rational) solution.
 
Hurkyl said:
The numbers 1, 2^{1/4}, 2^{1/2}, 2^{3/4} are linearly independent over Q. Therefore, you can split your equation into four equations in four unknowns, and so you would usually expect to be able to apply linear algebra to compute the unique (rational) solution.

thanks

solution A= 4, B = 32, C = 256, D = 1
 
Another question,
My series is of the form S_{n} = G*S_{n-1} + H*S_{n-2} where S_0}=0 and S_{1}=1.
Also S_{n} = \{A,B,C,D\} = A + B*2^{1/4}+C2^{1/2} +D2^{3/4}
If a = floor n/4 then S_n
=
\{2^{a}-1,2^{a}-1,2^{a}-1,2^{a}-1\}, or
\{2^{a+1}-1,2^{a}-1,2^{a}-1,2^{a}-1\}, or
\{2^{a+1}-1,2^{a+1}-1,2^{a}-1,2^{a}-1\}, or
\{2^{a+1}-1,2^{a+1}-1,2^{a+1}-1,2^{a}-1\}, depending upon
the value of n mod 4, as 0,1,2,3 respectively.

If p = \prime > 3 then S_3 divides S_{4p+1} or S_{4p+2}

So If p = -1 mod 4 both S_2 and S_3 divide S_(4p+2).

If we allow radicals of the form 2^{1/8} then S_3 can be factored as (1+2^{1/4} + 2^{1/8})*(1 + 2^{1/4} -2^{1/8})
Also S_2 can be factored as (1+2^{1/4})*(1+2^{1/2} and each factor can be also be expressed as the difference of two squares if we allow units in "i".
And of course as I showed earlier S_(2p) divides S_(4p) and S_2 divides both S_2p and S_4p.
Could any of this be useful in factoring 2^{p} -1?
 
Last edited:
Hurkyl said:
The numbers 1, 2^{1/4}, 2^{1/2}, 2^{3/4} are linearly independent over Q. Therefore, you can split your equation into four equations in four unknowns, and so you would usually expect to be able to apply linear algebra to compute the unique (rational) solution.


Hurkyl, Really nice! DJ
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
Back
Top