Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- From: "Philippe 92" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 16:01:47 +0200
sttscitrans@xxxxxxxxx wrote :
On 19 May, 10:08, "Philippe 92" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
sttscitr...@xxxxxxxxx wrote :
I suppose you could use the "Vincenzo method"...
on a polynomial identity version of Pell's Equation
The f,g,h etc are polynimials with integer coefficients
f^2-gh^2 =1
The problem with polynomial Z[X] is worse as you can't define an
euclidian division :
you need Q[X], that is polynomial with _rational_ coefficients.
There does not have to be a Euclidean algorithm
on Z[sqrt(d)], but the continued fraction method
still works.
No, I speak about Z[X] that is the set of all polynomials in one
unknown X, with coefficients in integers Z.
[quote]
[/quote]The f,g,h etc are polynimials with integer coefficients
You need to have some Euclidean _division_ to be able to get the
floor(sqrt(g)), that is find a polynomial which is the approximate
square root of polynomial g.
Inside the algorithm, you need also to use the Euclidean division to
get
a floor( some p/q ).
There just can't be any method of defining some Euclidean division of
polynomials in Z[X].
That is given a and b in Z[X] to find q and r in Z[X] with
a = b*q + r and 0 <= f(r) < f(b) with some indicator function f(p) for
any p in Z[X] -> f(p) in N, and some additional properties of f(), like
f(u*v) >= f(u) for any u,v != 0
The proof for that is quite easy.
Not imagine and try all possible functions f() ! but :
Suppose there were an Euclidean _division_, then it could be used to
define an Euclidean _algorithm_, which, extended, would lead to a
Bezout theorem : GCD(a,b) = a*u + b*v
Let a = X and b = 2, they are coprime that is GCD = 1, and it is
impossible to find u and v with X*u + 2*v = 1, just because the
constant term of X*u + 2*v is even, hence contradiction.
In Q[X], that is the set of polynomials with coeficients in Q
(rationals), such an Euclidean division exists, and f(p) is just the
degree of p.
For Euclidean division in integers, f() ist just the absolute value,
giving the usual 0 <= r < |b|
Hence many properties required to solve a Pell's like equation are no more
available.
Yes, you would think the cyclic method would work
on polynomoal Pell equations
How do you solve for p in a*p^2 + b*p + c = 0 with
a,b,c,p /in Z[X] ???
Regards.
--
Philippe C., mail : chephip+news@xxxxxxx
site : http://chephip.free.fr/ (recreational mathematics)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- From: sttscitrans@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- References:
- x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- From: Vincenzo Librandi
- Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- From: Philippe 92
- Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- From: sttscitrans@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- From: sttscitrans@xxxxxxxxx
- x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- Prev by Date: Re: Paths
- Next by Date: Re: Solving g(xy)=g(2x)*g(y/3)+g(2x)+g(y/3) , x>0
- Previous by thread: Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- Next by thread: Re: x^2 - Ay^2 =1
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading