Here's the question you clicked on:

55 members online
  • 0 replying
  • 0 viewing

henpen

  • 3 years ago

Show that 168 cannot be expressed as the sum of the squares of two rational numbers.

  • This Question is Closed
  1. henpen
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    \[13^2=\frac{a^2}{b^2}+\frac{m^2}{n^2}+1\]

  2. henpen
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    \[13^2=\frac{(pm)^2}{(qn)^2}+\frac{m^2}{n^2}+1\]\[13^2=\frac{(pm)^2+(qm)^2}{(qn)^2}+1\]

  3. henpen
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    \[a,b,m,n \in \mathbb{Z}\]

  4. henpen
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Curse you, Diophantus!

  5. asnaseer
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 2

    :)

  6. asnaseer
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 2

    Here are my thoughts - if:\[168=a^2+b^2\]then either a and b are both even or both odd. take the case of both odd so a=2m+1 and b=2n+1:\[168=4m^2+4m+4n^2+4n+2\]which leads to:\[166=4(m^2+n^2+m+n)\]but 166 is not evenly divisible by 4 so this case can be rejected. now take both a and b as even, so a=2m and b=2n leads to:\[168=4m^2+4n^2\]thus:\[42=m^2+n^2\]strange how the number 42 appears everywhere :) I can continue on this train of thought - but do you think it will lead anywhere good?

  7. henpen
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Are you assuming that a and b are integers?

  8. asnaseer
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 2

    ah! sorry - didn't read your question properly - let me think again...

  9. henpen
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    Fair enough, I made the same mistake intially.

  10. asnaseer
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 2

    hmmm - this is beyond my current understanding. However, I did find this article that has a very similar problem - maybe you will be able to understand it better: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:zNNprPwolosJ:www.math.ucsd.edu/~okikiolu/104b/hws4.pdf+&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjuK9ScKokS94ta6viGZM-sAr6CpRkDKkoZCaHDIYTKGyysQ3HV4V9WXpsfgaE3-1QNepW2Q-3KKfpDfhJpOfRb3e8q0wGZTkkcD9AfH-IYVEtu7DqwdSfxSG_443AnysJK3vDs&sig=AHIEtbQavqEWSt-SGk2LHnfyVAiU8D1IHA It is on the first page - problem 4: Show that 21 cannot be expressed as the sum of squares of two rational numbers.

  11. henpen
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 1

    This is from the very interesting http://www.komal.hu/verseny/feladat.cgi?a=honap&h=201211&t=mat&l=en if anyone's interested. @asnaseer , thanks for the link

  12. asnaseer
    • 3 years ago
    Best Response
    You've already chosen the best response.
    Medals 2

    thanks @henpen - gives me more things to learn! :)

  13. Not the answer you are looking for?
    Search for more explanations.

    • Attachments:

Ask your own question

Sign Up
Find more explanations on OpenStudy
Privacy Policy