Square pyramidal numbers and Tetrahedral numbers

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Helios
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numbers Square
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between square pyramidal numbers and tetrahedral numbers, specifically whether there are any numbers besides 1 that are both. Participants explore definitions, mathematical reasoning, and the implications of their findings.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Square pyramidal numbers are defined as n(n + 1)(2n + 1) / 6, while tetrahedral numbers are defined as n(n + 1)(n + 2) / 6.
  • One participant suggests that probabilistically, it is unlikely for there to be a number besides 1 that is both square pyramidal and tetrahedral, estimating the probability of such a match as falling off rapidly as n increases.
  • Another participant asserts that the only solution to the equation relating square pyramidal and tetrahedral numbers is n = 1, providing a cancellation method to arrive at this conclusion.
  • A later reply clarifies that the original poster is looking for solutions to a different equation than initially stated, which involves both n and m.
  • It is mentioned that according to MathWorld, 1 is the only solution, with a reference to a proof from 1988, although the availability of the source is questioned.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that 1 is the only solution, but there is some contention regarding the proper formulation of the problem and the availability of proof. The discussion includes differing views on the likelihood of finding additional solutions.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the definitions and formulations of the equations being discussed, as well as the availability of the cited proof from MathWorld.

Helios
Messages
267
Reaction score
63
There are square pyramidal numbers and tetrahedral numbers, defined

Square pyramidal numbers = n ( n + 1 )( 2 n + 1) / 6
1, 5, 14, 30, 55, 91, 140, 204, 285, 385, 506, 650, ...

Tetrahedral numbers = n ( n + 1 )( n + 2 ) / 6

1, 4, 10, 20, 35, 56, 84, 120, 165, 220, 286, 364, ...

and I was wondering if there's a number(s) besides 1 that is both.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have to guess no. Purely for probabilistic reasons. For any number n, the probability that there is a pyramidal number equal to n(n+1)(n+2)/6 is ~1/n^2, falling off too fast as n -> infinity. So, for example, the probability of a hit for n>100 is ~0.01. Once we've checked the first 100 n's, we can be fairly sure that there won't be any hits beyond that.

But I have no idea how to give a proper proof.
 
The answer is no. You are looking for solutions of the equation:

[tex] \frac {n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6} = \frac {n(n+1)(n+2)}{6}[/tex]

Cancelling terms we get

[tex] 2n+1 = n+2[/tex]

Solving for n you find n = 1 as the only solution
 
csco said:
The answer is no. You are looking for solutions of the equation:

[tex] \frac {n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6} = \frac {n(n+1)(n+2)}{6}[/tex]

Cancelling terms we get

[tex] 2n+1 = n+2[/tex]

Solving for n you find n = 1 as the only solution

The OP is looking for solutions to

[tex] \frac {n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6} = \frac {m(m+1)(m+2)}{6}[/tex]
not

[tex] \frac {n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6} = \frac {n(n+1)(n+2)}{6}[/tex]
.
 
According to Mathworld, 1 is the only solution, and this fact was only proven in 1988 (so, no easy proof is forthcoming).
 
hamster143 said:
According to Mathworld, 1 is the only solution, and this fact was only proven in 1988 (so, no easy proof is forthcoming).

really? Can you give a cite?
 
MathWorld gives
Beukers, F. "On Oranges and Integral Points on Certain Plane Cubic Curves." Nieuw Arch. Wisk. 6, 203-210, 1988.​
but Nieuw Archief voor Wiskunde's online archives only go back to 2000.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
15K