Lamphong17761@yahoo.

com

Chapter 3:

A: Pythagorean equation:
The Pythagorean equation, is important in all type of area: mathematics, physics, and astronomy and has practical applications in surveying. It is associated with the name of the Greek philosopher and mathematician Pythagoras, who lived during the 7th century BC. Though, there is evidence show that it was known at least 1,000 years before him. Babylonian texts dating from as early as 1800 BC contain discussions of Pythagorean triples. In number theory, its a important theorem, which help solving a lot of Diophantine equation and proving many others important theorem like Fermat last teorem for n = 4, Fermat-like equation,ect....
a) Pythagorean equation:

Pythagorean equation is the equation which has the form of:

with are positive integral. Such triples of solutions are called Pythagorean triples, and here,of course, we only concern about its primitive roots, which means . Now, we gonna find the fomular that can gives us all the primitive solution of this equation. 1. First, we got a lemma: If is a primitive Pythagorean triple then x, y, z are pairwise coprime; x, y have different parity and z is odd. Indeed, assume that . If p is a prime with then contradict with the supposition .. Thus Similarly for Since then cant be concurrently even. Assume that are odd then and this is impossible so are differrent about odd even parity so is odd. Without any lost of generality, we assume that x is even. 2. Secondly, we will now prove that is a primitive Pythagorean triple (with x is even) if and if only:

with

have different parity. Proof: We have that: x = (z + y) (z y)

( )=

(2)

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

Since z, y are odd and relatively prime so self evidence). Combine this with (2), we have that Le

; ;

are relatively prime. (readers are all squares.

with m, n are relatively prime then:

Since y, z is odd so m, n is different about odd-even parity. Since In conclusion: then

with Reverse,

have different parity. is a triple satisfied (1).

b) Application of Pythagorean equation:

Now, we will come back to prove the theorem that Ive mentioned at chapter 2: Prove that the equation for is prime, has one and only one solution in Z (not count its interchange). Proof: Suppose that the equation then: . Since p is prime and is odd and the other is even. Suppose that ( Its definitely that ( [ because if prime then If (*) ( . then: ( ) ( ) ) and: then one of ( and one of are even and are odd. (*) are relatively prime, ] then suppose d is a prime that p | then from (*), we got and since are has two different solutions on ;

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

(1)

=> we got this is illogical. ] (cuz

. Combine this with gcd( ;

[ Thus, with primitive roots. So:

. Then (*) is the Pythagorean equation (3)

are even)

With ( ,

) = 1 and

are different about odd-even parity. = then = then or | , so (5). <

Without any lost of generality, we got that if (3) (4). We also got that | and since (

and since ( then

From (4) and (5), we got that So, ,

), which is illogical. ).

the equation has another root (x; y) = ( ;

The problem are now return to: Continue proving like this, we have the equation has infinitely solution on which is illogical because therere just finitely the number of the positive integers that smaller than p. So, it must be: Or the equation has only one solution on N (not counting its interchange) and the problem has been proved.

B. Fermat equations:
Fermat equation or Fermats Last Theorem was proposed by the French mathematician Pierre de Fermat. In mathematics, its a famous theorem for its difficulty and the proving process of this theorem has led to many important discoveries in both algebra and analysis. While studying the work of the ancient Greek mathematician Diophantus, Fermat wrote in pencil in the margin of his copy of a book by Diophantus, The equation an + b n = cn has no positive integral root for . I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain. This equation is called Fermat equation. For more than 350 years, many mathematicians tried to prove Fermats statement or to disprove it by finding an exception. In June 1993, Andrew Wiles, an English mathematician at Princeton University, claimed the proof the theorem; however, in December of that year reviewers found a gap in his proof. On October 6, 1994, Wiles sent a revised proof to three colleagues. On October 25, 1994, after his colleagues judged it complete, Wiles published his proof.

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com
Theorem 3.1:

The equation: Fermat theorem for

has no positive integral root. And from that, get the proof of is the set

Proof: Suppose that the equation above does has integral root. Then let of root that is the smallest one. Then: Firstly, we got that ( . Indeed, if ( . We have . So is a solution with supposition that is the smallest one. Thus, then

then let p is a prime that => . Thats contradict with our is even and is odd

is a primitive Pythagorean triple. Suppose that

with parity. From , we

are positive integral ;

is different about odd-even

is a a primitive Pythagorean triple, so:

with ( Assume tha =>

are positive integral;

have different parity.

. Combine this with (*), we got that . Yet, Combine this (**), we got that is a solution of the equation with supposition that is the smallest one.

. So, ( , contradict with our cuz:

From this, we got this corollary: Fermat last theorem is right for every
Theorem 3.2:

The equation:

(5)

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

has no positive integral root. Proof: Suppose that the equation above does has integral root. Then let of root that is the smallest one. Then: Firstly, we got that ( . Indeed, if gcd( . We have . So is a solution with supposition that is the smallest one. Thus, If is a primitive Pythagorean triple. is the set

then let p is a prime that => . Thats contradict with our

is even and is odd then there exist positive integers m, n such that ; is different about odd-even parity Hence, is a solution of (5) but That contradict with our supposition that is the smallest one. If

is even then there exist positive integers such that have different parity and = ; . Thus, is a primitive Pythagorean triple so there exist positive integers such that have different parity or . In every case, we all got that . Since (a, b) = 1 then . Thus . Hence, is a solution of (5) but < . That contradict with our supposition that is the smallest one.
Theorem 3.3: Prove that the equation has no positive integral solution:

Proof: Suppose the equation does have positive integral solution. Let is a solution with is the smallest one, similarly to the proof of the previous theorem, we get that gcd . Assume that is even , let Since then is odd. We get: Since is odd and so .Thus, is a primitivePytagorean triple. Thus, there exist the positive integers such that a and has different odd-even parity such that contradict with theorem Theorem 3.4: Prove that the equation

has no positive integral solution.

Proof: Suppose the equation does have positive integral solution. Let is a solution with is the smallest one, similarly to the proof of the previous theorem, we get that gcd . Assume that is even , let So, we get is a soltuion with , a contradiction. Thus, is odd. We get: Since is odd and so .Thus, is a primitive

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com
Pytagorean triple. Thus, there exist the positive integers and has different odd-even parity such that contradict with theorem Excercise: such that a

We note that the theorem 3.1 and 3.2 are right not only for just coprime but also for the case of We have some excercise from that: Application of theorem 3.1: Excercise 1: Solve these equation on N: a) b) c) d) e) Guide: a)

are pairwise

According to the theorem 3.1, we got that: this equation doesnt has positive integral root so: Thus is the only root of this equation on N. b) From theorem 3.1, we got that: this equation doesnt has positive integral root so: If then .Let then this fomula:

give us sets of roots of the equation. If then . Let

then this fomula:

is the second fomula that give us sets of roots of the equation. c) so The equation has two solution on N: d)

So Roots: e) [ Roots: Application of theorem 3.2: ]

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

Excercise 2: Solve these equation on N: a) b) c) d) e) Guide: a) According to the theorem 3.2, we got that: this equation doesnt has positive integral root, yet so: Thus is the only root of this equation on N. b)

From theorem 3.1, we got that: this equation doesnt has positive integral root so: In both instances, we all got that the equation has no solution on N. c) So But in both instances, we all got that the equation has no solution on N. d)

So Roots: e) From theorem 3.1, we got that: this equation doesnt has positive integral root, yet, this equation must be solve on N, so so: then: Thats illogical so the equation has no solution on N.

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

C. Fermat - like equations:

Inspired from Fermat last thorem, we have another problem: Let n be a positive integers greater than 1. Find all distinguish the positive integers (a, b, c) so that make up a arithmetic progression. This problem is equivalent to this one: Find all the positive integral solution of the equation: Fermat-like equations. then: which is called

Here, we only talk about this equation with the primitive roots and mainly for n = 2,

Its easy to see that: x, y are not divisible by 2. Assume that x is odd, then y is odd, too. Then the left-side hand of the equation . Thus so If If then obviously , then assume that Let u = is odd. If . is a solution satisfied the theme. ;v= . So then: is a primitive . then

From Pythagorean triple so:

with parity.So:

are positive integral ;

is different about odd-even

has equal roles in the equation so we can conclude the solution is:

with

are positive integral ;

is different about odd-even parity.

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

Example: with

make a number theory progression or

Chapter 4: There are many ways to solve the Diophantus equation like using divisibility; inequalities or the familiar like Fermat or Wilson,... theorem;... but sometimes these method can give us long and complex solutions. Meanwhile, by using geometric, we can have the simple , interesting solutions.

1) Example:
For an example: the Minkovsky theorem: let and . Then, the equation been prove like this: , and are the integer such that has integral roots had

Consider the perpendicular Cartesian coordinate system where scalar product is caculated by fomula: This scalar give us the distance from the origin of coordinates to (x, y) is We find the shortest distance from origin of coordinates to a certain point that differrent from (0; 0) of the integral net (m; n) (m, n are integers). Lets call this distanceis and the point is then: The set of point (x, y) of the plane satisfied equality: is ab ellipse.If we this ellipse with ratio . Bring this contractive ellipse to the centers on the integral points (advance equally) then if all the ellipse we got intersect, they will intersect at edge-points only. ITs easy to see that the intersecting area of the ellipse with the triangle which has its summits at and equal to a haft area of the whole ellipse , yet, this area equal to : So, the area that the ellipse taking in the triangle is and this is just a part of the triangles area, equal to , which mean But is positive integral so ! Thus, the Minkowsky theorem are now proved. And now, I will introduce some application of geometry in number theory with the secant method which is a typical example of applying coordinate geometry in number theory, study about the integral points and the rational points on the curves the method which lead to the notion of Elliptic curve, set the foundation for proving Fermat last theorem.

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

At first, we will get acquainted with through the fist example: Example 1:Find all roots that different from (0,0,0) of the equation:

Solution: At first, we alter the equation in to: Let then

With u, v are rational numbers. Our problem are now turn into finding all rational points on the curve (C): . Its easy to see that, (; ) is a rational point of the curve. So, if (u0; v0) is a another rational point of the curve then the angular coefficient of straight line between (; ) and (u0; v0) would be rational.On the other hand, if is the straight line go through (; ) with the angular coefficient k then applying Vite theorem for the abscissa equation, we will got that the second intersection point of this line with (E) would have integral co-ordinate s, which means: [ ]

By using Vite theorem, we got:

yet

so we got that:

We can also find the set of roots of (1) from this. For an example: with root of (1). we got: and we have as a

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

And now, we will talk some more about its application in:

2) Ilovi theorem:
a) IloVi theorem:

This theorem talk about the set of roots of the equation has type of with a doesnt has quadratic submultiple that bigger than one. Of course, in this books framework, we only talk about the orginal set of root or are relatively prime. We will find its general fomular by using the secant method: We alter the equation into:

Let

Its definitely that this equation always takes ( This is similar to the problem before, we got: with k is rational

)=

as its rational root.

By using Vite theorem, we got:

yet

= 0 so:

Because Then:

s rational so: there exist 2 integers (*)

such that

an

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

Suppose that Then so and

yet

so , we got:

, combine with (*); (**) and

but we just take the integral roots so this fomular can also be write as:

with We call this is the fomular (I) Continue expanding (*),we will got fomular (II),concrete : o Case 1: is even: - If is even then and y is even => but a doesnt have quadratic submultiple that bigger than one, which mean a is not divisible by 4. So, . That is contradict with the supposition So, z is odd then y is odd. is even If

- If d is even then

, yet a is even but has no submultiple that bigger than 1 so which is contradict with the supposition So d is not divisible by 4, which means . => d | e. Let then

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

o Case 2: - If is odd then (mod 4) => if

have different parity. (mod 4). Thats illogical!

is even then

is even and is odd. we got that s odd, yet is different about parity. Thats illogical!

If d 2 then, from = So, is odd, yet Let

then:

Let

we got that:

Let

If

is even then Let then

all are odd

then:

have equal role so, we can also write like this:

o Case 3: its definitely that is odd. - If d is odd then: e, f is different about odd-even quality , yet is odd . Let then:

y is odd.

Let

then we got:

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

If

is even then:

all are odd we got

Combine this with Let y 2. Let then

then:

because u and v have equal role so, we can also write like this:

2) IloVi fomula: Conclude: In conclusion, we got two fomular for the type of the equation with x, y, z are the positive integer like this: Fomula (I):

with

if

is odd and

if

even.

Fomular (II): o With is even:

All the integeral roots of this equation can be found by using this fomula:

With

is integral;

o With a is odd: All the integeral roots of this equation can be found by using these two fomula:

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

wtih and with

are odd;

are integral;

3) Applications of IloVi theorem:

Well talk about this more in the next chapter but now, therere some simple example: Example 1: Sovle : (*)

in integral field, suppose x, y, z are pairwise coprime. Solution: (*) Its definitely that are relatively prime.

Applying IloVi fomula (II),combine with the equal roles of m and n,we have two case: Case 1: Case 2: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) m) Excercise: Find whole the positive integers x, y such that:

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

l) n) p) q) g) h) Guide: a)

b)

c)

j)

k)

m)

l)

n)

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

A: Some more theorem:

Theorem 5.1: Prove that the equation: with a is a prime, Guide: If then suppose while with a is a prime so or a contradiction with our supposition is has no positive integral set of roots. and e get . From this, we get . so or

So, gcd(q, t) =1; p, q, are pairwise coprime. Now, suppose (x, y, z) is the set of equation with z take the smallest value then using IloVi fomula, we get: with If If then 4| then we get and from such that while 2|e and and then: , a contradiction. , we get: there exist . By

But and y both are odd, so if then contradiction. So or 2 . Obviously , are pairwise coprime. Applying loVi fomula we get: 2 If then contradiction. If then ( so we can let: which means We also get that is z is the smallest one. If If 2| If 2| If then with then then then while while . Let then . Since , we can let | | while and ,

,a

,a ,

, combine with

then with is of a solution of

are pairwise coprime, on . , contradict with our supposition

. , a contracdiction. is odd , a contracdiction. then

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com

which means

is of a solution of

on

with

, contradict with our supposition is z is the smallest one. If d = a then there exist the positive integers or then then while . . Comebine this with such that we get : with

Since y is odd, a is odd, we get e is odd,

If If

, a contradiction. , a contradiction.

If d=1 then Let e= then . From this, we do similiarly to the case d=2a. In connclusion, the equation: with a is a prime, has no positive integral set of roots.

From the solution of this problem, we also get that: with a is a prime, So: Theorem: The two equations: has no positive integral set of roots. with a is a prime, has no positive integral set of roots.

B: Fouth degree equations and some equations with the even degree:
Example 1: Prove that the equation Guide: Rewrite the equation as . Now, applying IloVi theorem, we get: has no positive integral roots.

and

or

with

are odd and

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com
or 17 If contradiction. If ( ( then combine with ) Since ) { } are odd, we get , a contradiction. , we get . We have 17 then which means ,a

In conclusion, the equation above has no positive integral roots. Example 2: Prove that the equation is not solvable in .

Guide: Here, Ill only talk about the instance in which x, y, z are pairwise coprime, the other is intended for the reader. We see that if So, x is odd. If y is odd then Rewrite the equation as { } , a contradiction. is even then wile is odd, then from , a contradiction. , we get that

So y is even. . Obiously that: we eliminate this case. is odd, y is even), a contradiction. Now, the proof is completed .

are pairwise coprime. By using IloVi theorem, we get

: by taking modulo 3 for From , we get or

('cuz x

Note: Another proof of this problem is available in the book: elementary theory of numbers-PWNPolish Scientific Publishers, 1998 (page 75). Example 3: Prove tht the equation: Guide: Now, suppose the equation above does have positive integral solution. Let of roots with b is the smallest then b is odd and: is the set has no positive integral solution.

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com
By using IloVi fomular, we get:
| | | |

with

. both are divisible for 2 while we get : there exist and . Then:

If d=4: gcd(e, f)=1, a contradiction. If d=2: the positive integers Combine with such that

According to Theorem 3.4:, we get the equation positive integral solution, so .

or

has no

, a contradiction. If d=1: is odd, so is odd which means e is odd. Similarly, there exist the positive integers such that and Then: so Treat this similarly like d=2, we get has no positive integral solution. And we completed the proof. has no positive integral solution.

. .

Example 4: Prove tht the equation: 2 Guide:

Now, suppose the equation above does have positive integral solution. Let of roots with b is the smallest then b is odd and:

is the set

By using IloVi fomular, we get:

| | | |

with

are the integers,

. both are divisible for 2 while we get : there exist

If d=4: gcd(e, f)=1, a contradiction. If d=2: the positive integers Combine with such that and

. Then:

As we had proved before at example 3,

has no positive integral solutions. , a contradiction.

Lamphong17761@yahoo.com
If so There exist the positive integers such that . Treat this similarly like d=2, we get solution. And we complete the proof. Example 5: Find all positive integral solution of the equation: Guide: Obviously Rewrite the equation as: Since is odd, we get: gcd we get: there exist the integers and is odd. is odd and is odd, f is even. . Then has no positive integral

Combine with and :

such that

Or

If then example 4, this type of equation has no positive inegral solution.

and as we had proved at