Is Fermat's Last Theorem Solvable for n=4 Using Pythagorean Triples?

  • MHB
  • Thread starter mente oscura
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Theorem
In summary: Regards.In summary, the conversation discusses a demonstration of Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4, using the traditional Pythagorean Triplets formula. The conversation also includes a proof of the impossibility of two Pythagorean Triplets sharing two common elements, which is a crucial step in proving FLT4. The conversation concludes with the demonstration of FLT4 and the impossibility of the equation x^4+y^4=z^4.
  • #1
mente oscura
168
0
Hello.

I share with you , a demonstration, which authorship is mine.

I do not know, if it exists, similar other one.Section A) demonstration Fermat’s Last Theorem, for n = 4.

[tex]Let \ A, \ B, \ C \ \in{\mathbb{N}} / A, \ C \ = \ odd; \ B \ = \ even \ / A^2+B^2=C^2[/tex]

(*)We consider, as possible:

[tex]A=x^2[/tex]

[tex]B=y^2[/tex]

[tex]C=z^2[/tex]

So:

[tex]x^4+y^4=z^4[/tex]

According to the "traditional" formulas, to obtain "Pythagorean Triplet":

[tex]A=M^2-N^2[/tex]

[tex]B=2MN[/tex]

[tex]C=M^2+N^2[/tex]

Properties:

1ª)

[tex]C+B=M^2+N^2+2MN=(M+N)^2[/tex]

[tex]C+B=z^2+y^2=(M+N)^2[/tex]. Por (*)

2ª)

[tex]C-B=M^2+N^2-2MN=(M-N)^2[/tex]

[tex]C-B=z^2-y^2=(M-N)^2[/tex]. Por (*)

Conclusion: we get two "Pythagorean triplet", in which two of its elements are equal.

[tex]z^2+y^2=(M+N)^2[/tex]

[tex]z^2-y^2=(M-N)^2[/tex]

Consideration: If we show that it is not possible that two "Pythagorean triplet", have two common elements, we will have shown the Fermat Last Theorem, for n = 4.

Section B) demonstration of the impossibility of that, two "Pythagorean triplet", have two common elements:

[tex]Let \ a, \ b, \ c \ \in{\mathbb{N}} / a, \ c \ = \ odd; \ b \ = \ even \ / a^2+b^2=c^2[/tex].(1)

[tex]Sean \ d, \ b, \ c \ \in{\mathbb{N}} / d, \ c \ = \ odd; \ b \ = \ even \ / c^2+b^2=d^2[/tex].(2)

Considerations:

1º) a, b, c, d, co-prime, so are primitive Pythagorean Triplets.

2º) “c” It is the odd small, which meets (1) y (2)Option 1º)

[tex]a^2+b^2=c^2[/tex]

[tex]a=m^2-n^2[/tex]

[tex]b=2mn[/tex]

[tex]c=m^2+n^2[/tex]Option 2º)

[tex]c^2+b^2=d^2[/tex]

[tex]c=u^2-v^2[/tex]

[tex]b=2uv[/tex]

[tex]d=u^2+v^2[/tex]

Course: "m" and "n" co-prime, same as "u" and "v".

By Option 1º) y Option 2º):

[tex]b=2mn=2uv[/tex]

I'm going to break down "b" in four co-prime factors: "e", "f", "g" and "h", such that:

[tex]b=2efgh[/tex]

And, we assign, for example:

[tex]m=ef[/tex]

[tex]n=gh[/tex]

[tex]u=eg[/tex]

[tex]v=fh[/tex]

Being: e=mcd(m,u), f=mcd(m,v), g=mcd(n,u), h=mcd(n,v)

Note: “mcd”= greatest common divisor.

Now, using the other element common to the Pythagorean Triplets: "c"

[tex]c=m^2+n^2=e^2f^2+g^2h^2[/tex]

[tex]c=u^2-v^2=e^2g^2-f^2h^2[/tex]

Therefore:

[tex]e^2f^2+g^2h^2= e^2g^2-f^2h^2[/tex]

[tex]g^2h^2+f^2h^2= e^2g^2-e^2f^2[/tex]

[tex]h^2(g^2+f^2)=e^2(g^2-f^2)[/tex]

To be "h" and "e" co-prime, and, also, [tex]g^2+f^2[/tex] y [tex]g^2-f^2[/tex], (note that "g" or "f" should be "evenr"), it follows that:

[tex]h^2=g^2-f^2[/tex]

[tex]e^2=g^2+f^2[/tex]

Thus, we have other two Pythagorean Triplets with two common elements, but:

[tex]c \ > \ g[/tex]

Since:

[tex]c=m^2+n^2>n^2=g^2h^2>g^2>g[/tex]

It is not possible, since we had considered "c", as the odd minor who met the conditions (1) and (2).

Whereupon, demonstrated the Section B)" and, therefore, also the "Section A)", concluding the impossibility of:

[tex]x^4+y^4=z^4[/tex]


Regards.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I haven't checked through all of your proof, but yes, your approach is absolutely correct : the main step towards FLT4 is to prove that there can't be any 4-tuple $(a, b, c, d)$ satisfying $a^2 + b^2 = c^2$ and $b^2 + c^2 = d^2$. The standard step actually is to rearrange and multiply both sides to get $(ad)^2 = c^4 - b^4$ and it can be shown by infinite descent that $x^4 - y^4 - z^2$ over $\Bbb C^3$ has no integer points over it.

EDIT : Hold it. I don't understand your step when you break up $b$ in 4 coprime factors $e, f, g$ and $h$. $b = 2mn = 2uv$ is absolutely correct and upto that I agree, and as a conclusion $mn = uv$, but I am not sure why you are assuming that $(m, n, u, v) = (ef, gh, eg, fh)$. How about $(m, n, u, v) = (pqr, xyz, pxy, qrz)$? In that case $m$ and $n$ are coprime, so are $u$ and $v$ and $m \cdot n = u \cdot v = xyzpqr$ also.

So my point is why break $b$ in $\boxed{4}$ parts? Why not $6$ or $8$ parts, like I did above?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
mathbalarka said:
I haven't checked through all of your proof, but yes, your approach is absolutely correct : the main step towards FLT4 is to prove that there can't be any 4-tuple $(a, b, c, d)$ satisfying $a^2 + b^2 = c^2$ and $b^2 + c^2 = d^2$. The standard step actually is to rearrange and multiply both sides to get $(ad)^2 = c^4 - b^4$ and it can be shown by infinite descent that $x^4 - y^4 - z^2$ over $\Bbb C^3$ has no integer points over it.

EDIT : Hold it. I don't understand your step when you break up $b$ in 4 coprime factors $e, f, g$ and $h$. $b = 2mn = 2uv$ is absolutely correct and upto that I agree, and as a conclusion $mn = uv$, but I am not sure why you are assuming that $(m, n, u, v) = (ef, gh, eg, fh)$. How about $(m, n, u, v) = (pqr, xyz, pxy, qrz)$? In that case $m$ and $n$ are coprime, so are $u$ and $v$ and $m \cdot n = u \cdot v = xyzpqr$ also.

So my point is why break $b$ in $\boxed{4}$ parts? Why not $6$ or $8$ parts, like I did above?

Hello.

where is the problem?

[tex]b=2mn=2uv=2xyzpqr[/tex]

According to your example:

[tex]m=pqr[/tex]

[tex]n=xyz[/tex]

[tex]u=pxy[/tex]

[tex]v=qrz[/tex]

We operate:

[tex]c=m^2+n^2=p^2q^2r^2+x^2y^2z^2[/tex]

[tex]c=u^2-v^2=p^2x^2y^2-q^2r^2z^2[/tex]

[tex]p^2q^2r^2+x^2y^2z^2=p^2x^2y^2-q^2r^2z^2[/tex]

[tex]q^2r^2(p^2+z^2)=x^2y^2(p^2-z^2)[/tex]

[tex]q^2r^2=p^2-z^2[/tex]

[tex]x^2y^2=p^2+z^2[/tex]

Two Pythagorean Triplets with two common elements, but:

[tex]c \ > \ p[/tex]

[tex]c=m^2+n^2=p^2q^2r^2+x^2y^2z^2[/tex]

Therefore:

[tex]c \ > \ p^2 \ > \ p[/tex]

Regards.
 
  • #4
Excellent, you have made it clear that even $4$ or $8$ or higher factors would result the same. I'll move on to the next point :

mente oscura said:
[tex]e^2f^2+g^2h^2= e^2g^2-f^2h^2[/tex]

[tex]g^2h^2+f^2h^2= e^2g^2-e^2f^2[/tex]

[tex]h^2(g^2+f^2)=e^2(g^2-f^2)[/tex]

To be "h" and "e" co-prime, and, also, [tex]g^2+f^2[/tex] y [tex]g^2-f^2[/tex], (note that "g" or "f" should be "evenr"), it follows that:

[tex]h^2=g^2-f^2[/tex]

[tex]e^2=g^2+f^2[/tex]

I don't understand this bit. $h$ and $e$ are coprime, yes, as $(m, n) = 1$, but why are $g^2 + f^2$ and $g^2 - f^2$ relatively coprime too? Please clarify.

[Note : If $ab = xy$, it is necessary condition to have $(a, x) = (b, y) = 1$ to conclude $a = y$ and $b = x$. Take for example, $5 \cdot 4 = 2 \cdot 10$, where $4$ and $10$ have nontrivial gcd]
 
  • #5
mathbalarka said:
Excellent, you have made it clear that even $4$ or $8$ or higher factors would result the same. I'll move on to the next point :
I don't understand this bit. $h$ and $e$ are coprime, yes, as $(m, n) = 1$, but why are $g^2 + f^2$ and $g^2 - f^2$ relatively coprime too? Please clarify.

[Note : If $ab = xy$, it is necessary condition to have $(a, x) = (b, y) = 1$ to conclude $a = y$ and $b = x$. Take for example, $5 \cdot 4 = 2 \cdot 10$, where $4$ and $10$ have nontrivial gcd]

Hello.

I have considered that "g" or "f" is an even number. Only one.

You can choose, what is the pair, and see how the result is similar.

In this case, the show is trivial:

[tex]Let \ i \ , \ j \in{\mathbb{N}} \ / one \ is \ even \ and \ the \ other \ odd[/tex]

[tex]If \ k |(i+j) \ and \ k |(i-j) \rightarrow{} k | (i+j+i-j) \rightarrow{}k|i[/tex]

[tex]If \ k |(i+j) \ and \ k |(i-j) \rightarrow{} k | (i+j-i+j) \rightarrow{}k|j[/tex]

Conclusion:

"i" and "j" they are not coprime.

Regards.
 

FAQ: Is Fermat's Last Theorem Solvable for n=4 Using Pythagorean Triples?

What is Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4?

Fermat's Last Theorem is a mathematical conjecture proposed by Pierre de Fermat in the 17th century. It states that no three positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation an + bn = cn for any integer value of n greater than 2.

Has Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4 been proven?

Yes, Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4 has been proven. This was done by mathematician Sophie Germain in the early 19th century.

How was Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4 proven?

Sophie Germain used a technique called "proof by infinite descent" to prove Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4. This involved showing that if the equation an + bn = cn has a solution, then there must be a smaller solution, and therefore an infinite descent of smaller solutions until reaching the smallest possible solution of 0.

What is the significance of Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4?

Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4 is significant because it was the first case of the theorem to be proven, and it helped pave the way for the eventual proof of the full theorem by Andrew Wiles in 1995. It also showed the power and effectiveness of proof by infinite descent in solving difficult mathematical problems.

Are there any practical applications of Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4?

While there are no direct practical applications of Fermat's Last Theorem for n=4, the techniques used in proving it have had applications in other areas of mathematics and have helped advance our understanding of number theory and algebraic geometry.

Similar threads

Back
Top