Solve 3 Integer Puzzle: a^3+b^3=17c^3

  • Thread starter IndustriaL
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses finding three integers, a, b, and c, where a^3 + b^3 = 17 * c^3, with a, b, and c being the smallest integers possible. The conversation explores different methods for solving this problem, such as factoring and using algebraic methods. It also mentions checking for solutions using Mathematica and considering different moduli. Ultimately, it is mentioned that the answer may be known for cubic number fields, but not for this specific case.
  • #1
IndustriaL
13
0
I want to find three integers, a b and c, with a^3 + b^3 = 17 * c^3.
all each the smallest integer possible
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
you could factor a^3+b^3 for a start, I suppose. 17 being prime must divide one of the factors. we can also suppose that a,b a nd c have no common factors.
 
  • #3
Well I like Number Theory too. Before I start coding this into Mathematica in a brute-force search, you know, (1,1), (1,2),. . . (2,1),(2,2), . . . I suppose there is no algebraic method for doing so? And while I'm at it, why not just search for the relation involving an arbitrary prime instead of 17 and then see if any conclusion can be drawn say for the first 100 primes.
 
  • #4
Assuming your not looking for the trivial solution (0,0,0) and other trivial solutions like (1, -1, 0). Then mathematica can't find a single instance where it is true.
 
  • #5
there are algebraic ways of factoring such things in number fields, though i don'y know much about them - they are of elementary (in the sense of important) interest in algebraic number theory.

you can also get conditions on a,b and c by considering it modulo some inetger. eg doing so mod 8 the cubic remainders are 0,1,3,5,7 and we need

a^3+b^3=c^3 mod 8

so that the only non trivisl way to do it is to have a^3=1,b^3=7 mod 8 or a^3=3, b^3=5 mod 8 or a^3=b^3=c^3=0 mod 8
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Zurtex said:
Assuming your not looking for the trivial solution (0,0,0) and other trivial solutions like (1, -1, 0). Then mathematica can't find a single instance where it is true.

Why not Zurtex? I respect you and Matt's opinions but I'm stubborn. You mind if I check?
 
  • #7
perhaps zurtex checked it in mathematica?

i meant to say, that the case a^3=b^3=c^3 can be dismissed as trivial since it implies that all of a,b,c are even thus it is not a "primitive" solution, but i forgot the cases

a^3=0 and b^3=c^3 mod 8
 
  • #8
looking mod 7 i think we find that 7 divides c and a^3 and b^3 are +/-1 mod 7 and mod 17 that a+b=0
 
  • #9
Alright, I'd like to qualify Zurtx's statement if I may: Mathematica cannot find any value of a and b under 5000 which satisfy the equation. Frankly, if I had access to a faster PC I'd run it up to a million at least as well as optimize my algorithm. It kinds looks like it's related to Fermat's theorem. Is there a proof that there is no solution?

Wait, he did say integers. Need to check some negative numbers too. Didn't say I was good in Number Theory, only that I'm interested in it. :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #10
saltydog said:
Alright, I'd like to qualify Zurtx's statement if I may: Mathematica cannot find any value of a and b under 5000 which satisfy the equation. Frankly, if I had access to a faster PC I'd run it up to a million at least as well as optimize my algorithm. It kinds looks like it's related to Fermat's theorem. Is there a proof that there is no solution?
Actually I just used the FindInstance function for c > 0 and then for c < 0.
 
  • #11
Zurtex said:
Actually I just used the FindInstance function for c > 0 and then for c < 0.

FindInstance? Suppose that's a 5.0 feature. I have 4.1.

IndustriaL, where you got this anyway? I'd like to see some closure in the matter. You know Richard Guy has a nice book out, "Unsolved Problems in Number Theory". Don't suppose anything like this is in there?
 
  • #12
i suspect if you have a basic knowledge of cubic number fields then the answer is known - we can do it for quadratics in quadratic number fields.
 
  • #13
matt grime said:
i suspect if you have a basic knowledge of cubic number fields then the answer is known - we can do it for quadratics in quadratic number fields.

Very well Matt. I'll leave it there.
 
  • #14
i say that but i am only guessing from the results about when we can solve x^2-dy^2=something; i don't have any knowledge of this at all.
 

1. What is the solution to the 3 Integer Puzzle: a^3+b^3=17c^3?

The solution to this puzzle is that there are no integer solutions. This has been proven by mathematicians using complex number theory.

2. How do you approach solving the 3 Integer Puzzle?

One approach is to use the Pythagorean theorem in combination with the fact that the sum of two cubes can be factored into (a+b)(a^2-ab+b^2). However, this approach will not lead to any integer solutions.

3. Can this puzzle be solved using trial and error?

No, this puzzle cannot be solved using trial and error as it involves complex numbers and requires a mathematical proof.

4. Is there a specific method or technique for solving this puzzle?

Yes, there are various methods and techniques used by mathematicians to approach this puzzle, such as using number theory, algebraic manipulation, and complex numbers. However, none of these methods have led to a solution for the 3 Integer Puzzle.

5. What implications does this puzzle have in the field of mathematics?

The 3 Integer Puzzle has significant implications in the field of mathematics as it highlights the complexity of number theory and the limitations of solving certain equations. It also emphasizes the importance of rigorous proof and the search for solutions in mathematics.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
845
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
748
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
692
  • General Math
Replies
22
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
772
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
913
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top