MHB Why Does Checking if 2 Divides z1 Matter in Rational Solutions for X^2+Y^2=n?

  • Thread starter Thread starter evinda
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the conditions under which the equation X^2 + Y^2 = n has rational solutions, particularly when n ≡ 3 (mod 4). It emphasizes that checking if z1 is even or odd is crucial, as both cases lead to contradictions regarding the modulo 4 properties of the resulting equations. If z1 is even, it results in x1^2 + y1^2 ≡ 0 (mod 4), while if z1 is odd, it leads to x1^2 + y1^2 ≡ 3 (mod 4), both contradicting the initial conditions. The choice of modulo to check depends on the specific problem, illustrating a common technique in number theory to eliminate possibilities. Understanding these modular conditions is essential for proving the absence of rational solutions in such equations.
evinda
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,741
Reaction score
0
Hi! (Smile)

I am looking at the following exercise:

In general, the equation $X^2+Y^2=n$, when $n \equiv 3 \pmod 4$, has no rational solution.

According to my notes:

Let $x=\frac{a}{b}, y=\frac{c}{d}, a,b,c,d \in \mathbb{Z}, b \cdot d \neq 0, (a,b)=1, (c,d)=1$, solution of $X^2+Y^2=n$.

$$\frac{a^2}{b^2}+\frac{c^2}{d^2}=n \Rightarrow (ad)^2+(bc)^2=n(bd)^2$$

That means, that the equation $X^2+Y^2=n Z^2$ has an integer solution $(x_1, y_1, z_1)=(ad, bc, bd)$.

Without loss of generality, we suppose that $gcd(x_1,y_1,z_1)=1$.

If $2 \mid z_1 \Rightarrow x_1^2+y_1^2 \equiv 0 \pmod 4 \Rightarrow (2 \mid x_1 \wedge 2 \mid y_1) \Rightarrow 2 \mid (x_1,y_1,z_1)=1, \text{ Contradiction}$

Therefore, $z_1=2k+1, z_1^2 \equiv 1 \pmod 4$

$$\Rightarrow n z_1^2 \equiv n \cdot 1 \pmod 4 \equiv 3 \pmod 4$$

$$\Rightarrow x_1^2+y_1^2 \equiv 3 \pmod 4, \text{ Contradiction.}$$

Why do we check if $2 \mid z_1$ ? (Sweating)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
$z_1$ can either be odd or even. If even, $z_1 = 0 \pmod{2}$ and hence $z_1^2 = 0 \pmod{4}$ and $x_1^2 + y_1^2 = 0 \pmod{4}$ leading to a contradiction as above.

If $z_1$ is odd, i.e., $z_1 = 1 \pmod{2}$ then $z_1^2 = 1 \pmod{4}$ in which case $x_1^2 + y_1^2 = 3 \pmod{4}$ which also leads to a contradiction.

It's a standard method in number theory to check case-by-case modulo something and eliminate the possibilities. That's what they have done above.
 
mathbalarka said:
$z_1$ can either be odd or even. If even, $z_1 = 0 \pmod{2}$ and hence $z_1^2 = 0 \pmod{4}$ and $x_1^2 + y_1^2 = 0 \pmod{4}$ leading to a contradiction as above.

If $z_1$ is odd, i.e., $z_1 = 1 \pmod{2}$ then $z_1^2 = 1 \pmod{4}$ in which case $x_1^2 + y_1^2 = 3 \pmod{4}$ which also leads to a contradiction.

It's a standard method in number theory to check case-by-case modulo something and eliminate the possibilities. That's what they have done above.

Ok.. but how can I know which modulo I should take?

For example, at this exercise: Show that $x^2+y^2=3$ has no rational solution, why do we check if $3 \mid x_1$ and not if $2 \mid x_1$ ? (Thinking)
 
That completely depends on the problem you're doing. It's more or less a "trick" of number theory of some sort.

In the example $X^2 + Y^2 = 3Z^2$ (where $\text{gcd}(X, Y, Z) = 1$), considering modulo $3$ provides an obvious way to "chuck out" $Z$ from the modulo argument, giving $X^2 + Y^2 = 0 \pmod{3}$. However, this is possible if and only if $X^2 = Y^2 = 0 \pmod{3}$ (why?) in which case $X = Y = 0 \pmod{3}$. But then $X^2 + Y^2 = 0\pmod{9}$, thus $3 | Z^2 \Rightarrow 3|Z$. But then $\text{gcd}(X, Y, Z)=3 \neq 1$, contrary to our assumption.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Back
Top