Let $a_n$ and $b_n$ be 2 sequences of $n$ rationals.

Is it possible that $\sqrt 7 = \sum_{m=1}^{n} a_m (-1)^{b_m}$ ? Is it possible that $\sqrt{17}$ = $\sum_{m=1}^{n} a_m (-1)^{b_m}$ ?

How to prove or disprove these ?

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Wait: What does this have to do with representation-theory? $\endgroup$ – awllower Feb 15 '13 at 5:04
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think your question accurately reflects the title. You use $n$ to index your sets and also as the size of the sets, this is confusing. Also don't you want the $a_k$ to be roots of unity, not rationals? $\endgroup$ – Dylan Yott Jun 25 '13 at 15:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DylanYott The roots of unity (confusingly, I agree) are actually the other terms; they're the $(-1)^{b_m}$ factors in those sums. (Remember, $b_m$ is a rational, not an integer, so these are complex values) $\endgroup$ – Steven Stadnicki Jun 25 '13 at 15:36
  • $\begingroup$ To extend Dylan's point slightly, though, the expression $(-1)^{b_m}$ is confusing because it requires a canonical choice of branch for the (implicit) logarithm; it would be much better to write those terms as $e^{2m\pi i/n}$, or $\zeta^m$ in terms of a canonical root of unity $\zeta=e^{2\pi i/n}$, as Jyrki does in their answer. $\endgroup$ – Steven Stadnicki Jun 25 '13 at 15:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You may be interested in this closely related question. $\endgroup$ – Andrés E. Caicedo Jun 25 '13 at 16:33

Let $\zeta=e^{2\pi i/7}$. We know that the sum $$ 1+\zeta+\zeta^2+\cdots+\zeta^6=0. $$ Let $$ S=\zeta+\zeta^2+\zeta^4. $$ Then by squaring we get $$ S^2=\zeta^2+\zeta^4+\zeta^8+2\zeta^3+2\zeta^5+2\zeta^6. $$ Observe that $\zeta^8=\zeta$. Subtract the above equation multiplied by two from this to get $$ S^2=-2-\zeta-\zeta^2-\zeta^4=-2-S. $$ Let $M=2S+1$. Then $$ M^2=4S^2+4S+1=4(-2-S)+4S+1=-7. $$ Therefore $M=\pm i\sqrt7$, and you can surely construct a sum of the required type from this.

The above recipe works for all primes $p$ instead of $p=7$ as long as you follow the rule that the exponents of $\zeta$ (here $1,2,4$) are the quadratic residues modulo $p$ (so you need $(p-1)/2$ terms in the sum $S$). Whether you get $+p$ or $-p$ as the square depends on the residue class of $p$ modulo $4$.

Look up Gauss' sums for details of the general case.

  • $\begingroup$ So, you are saying $i\sqrt{p}\in \mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$ for any primitive $p$ th root $\zeta$.. $\endgroup$ – user87543 Aug 6 '14 at 19:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Almost but not quite, @Praphulla. A closer examination reveals that $\sqrt p\in\Bbb{Q}(\zeta)$, if $p\equiv1\pmod4$ and $i\sqrt p\in\Bbb{Q}(\zeta)$, if $p\equiv 3\pmod4$. By Galois theory $\Bbb{Q}(\zeta)$ has a unique quadratic subfield so we have just found it! Here $p$ is an odd prime number. $\endgroup$ – Jyrki Lahtonen Aug 6 '14 at 20:03
  • $\begingroup$ Ok Ok.. I would think on this :) $\endgroup$ – user87543 Aug 6 '14 at 20:05
  • $\begingroup$ Nice approach! (+1) $\endgroup$ – Hypergeometricx Oct 18 '15 at 17:16

Let $d$ be an integer. The field extension $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{d}) / \mathbb{Q}$ is a abelian extension, and therefore it is a subextension of a cyclotomic field extension $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta) / \mathbb{Q}$ where $\zeta$ is some root of unity. Thus, $\sqrt{d} \in \mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$ -- that is, $\sqrt{d}$ is a rational function of $\zeta$.

Since $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta)/\mathbb{Q}$ is an algebraic extension, this further means that $\sqrt{d}$ is a polynomial in $\zeta$ with rational coefficients, which is easy to put into the form you seek.

In fact, because $\sqrt{d}$ is an algebraic integer, it must lie in $\mathbb{Z}[\zeta]$, we can even select the $a_m$ to be integers. In fact, we can even arrange to have all of the $a_m$ be equal to 1, if we allow roots of unity to be repeated in the sum.

  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Reference: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronecker%E2%80%93Weber_theorem $\endgroup$ – Andreas Caranti Feb 10 '13 at 14:55
  • $\begingroup$ Just to be clear, this also implies that $\sqrt d$ can be represented as $\sum a_m\cdot 1^{b_m}$ for integer $a_m$, by multiplying through by the common denominator, correct? $\endgroup$ – MJD Feb 10 '13 at 15:04
  • $\begingroup$ @MJD: Yes, because the ring of integers in $\mathbb{Q}(\zeta)$ is $\mathbb{Z}[\zeta]$, and $\sqrt{d}$ is an algebraic integer. (I don't follow your recipe) $\endgroup$ – user14972 Feb 10 '13 at 15:18

The square root of any number $n$, can be derived from the span of chords of a polygon $2n$, and $n$ if $4|n-1$. Correspondingly, since the cords can be derived from cyclotomic roots of $1$ (ie numbers of the form $cis(\pi m/n)$ where $0<m<2n$, then all such square roots can be so derived.

One approach to solving this sort of equation, is to look for a primitive root. For $13$, we might note that $2$ is a primitive root. We then create a power-series of $2$, modulo $13$. This gives a series of 12 numbers. We alternate these into two alternate series, eg

$$c(n) = cis(2\pi n/13)$$ $$S1 = c(1)+c(4)+c(3)+c(12)+c(9)+c(10)$$ $$S2 = c(2)+c(8)+c(6)+c(11)+c(5)+c(7)$$

One can see that the subscript in $S2$ is twice that of $S1$, and the subscript of the following term in $S1$ is four times that of the base term. So $3=4*4 mod 13$, etc.

Now, the isomorphism between $S1$ and $S2$ corresponds to a reversal of sign on a square-root. There is a therom that the product of numbers $1-c(n)$ for $n$ = 1 to p-1, gives p (here $p=13$), so the square root here is that $13 = (6-S1)*(6-S2)$. This works for all primes.

It should be noted that $6-S1$ is not exactly $\sqrt{13}$, but something that involves this prime, like $(13+3 \sqrt{13})/2$ or similar.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.