8
$\begingroup$

Let $x$ be rational with $0<x<1$ and let $y$ be the rational defined by $y = 1 - x.$ Let $n$ be any natural number with $n>2.$ Then I want to prove that $$x^{(1-1/n)}+ y^{(1-1/n)}$$ will never be a rational.

Here is my attempt:
Let $x=\dfrac{a}{c}$ and $y=\dfrac{b}{c}$ where $a,b$ are positive integers such that $a+b=c.$
Then it is equivalent to show that the following number is irrational, $$a\Big(1+\frac{b}{a}\Big)^{1/n}+b\Big(1+\frac{a}{b}\Big)^{1/n},∀n\in\mathbb N\setminus\{1\}.$$ After this I was stuck. How can I continue? Hints are also welcome.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Let $u=x^{n-1}$ and $v=y^{n-1}$ By Boreico’s theorem (see section "Higher powers" on pages 91-92 at http://www.thehcmr.org/issue2_1/mfp.pdf), $u^{\frac{1}{n}}+v^{\frac{1}{n}}$ is rational iff $u^{\frac{1}{n}}$ and $v^{\frac{1}{n}}$ are both rational. Since $n-1$ and $n$ are coprime, this is equivalent to $x^{\frac{1}{n}}$ and $y^{\frac{1}{n}}$ being both rational. As Jack M remarked, your conjecture is then equivalent to Fermat’s last theorem.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It would be nice to see a simpler proof of this fact, but this deals with the problem quite nicely. $\endgroup$ – Slade Oct 13 '14 at 8:18
  • $\begingroup$ @Slade in fact Boreico’s argument is not very complicated, and an ad-hoc reformulation could be made here, though I don’t have the time to write that out now. $\endgroup$ – Ewan Delanoy Oct 13 '14 at 8:23
  • $\begingroup$ Perhaps I should have said "more digestible". The ideas do look simple, but I need some time to process exactly what is going on. $\endgroup$ – Slade Oct 13 '14 at 8:26
  • $\begingroup$ @EwanDelanoy: I get the paper that you gave. It will take a little time to me understand that:) Thanks for your help. $\endgroup$ – Bumblebee Oct 13 '14 at 10:39
14
$\begingroup$

Your conjectured statement isn't true. Take $x=\frac{36}{100}$ and $n=2$. Then

$$x^{1-\frac1n}+y^{1-\frac1n} =\left(\tfrac{36}{100}\right)^{\tfrac12}+\left(\tfrac{64}{100}\right)^{\tfrac12}=\tfrac75 $$

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Oooh. How about $n>2.$ $\endgroup$ – Bumblebee Oct 3 '14 at 4:03
  • $\begingroup$ Shall I edit the question? $\endgroup$ – Bumblebee Oct 3 '14 at 4:04
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Normally I don't like question edits that invalidate good answers, but the existence of Pythagorean triples does trivialize the problem for $n=2$, and it's a somewhat deep problem for $n\geq 3$. $\endgroup$ – Slade Oct 3 '14 at 9:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Nilan: I don't know if it's true for $n>2$ or not. Do you have some reason to think it is true? Are you asking for help proving this, or for help discovering whether or not it's true? $\endgroup$ – MPW Oct 3 '14 at 15:23
1
$\begingroup$

Your conjecture that this has no solutions (when $n>2$) is actually equivalent to Fermat's last theorem. You just need to find an $x$ such that both $x$ and $1-x$ are rational $n$-th powers. If $x=\frac {a^n} {b^n}$, then $1-x=\frac {b^n - a^n} {b^n}$, so we're trying to solve $b^n-a^n=c^n\iff a^n+c^n=b^n$. By Fermat's last theorem this has no solutions when $n>2$ other than the ones in which $x$ is either $0$ or $1$. When $n=2$ it does, however, and the usual method for generating pythagorean triples will get you all of them.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ If $x^{1/n},(1-x)^{1/n}\in\mathbb{Q}$, then this is surely correct. But is it at all obvious that this follows from $x,y,x^{1-1/n}+y^{1-1/n}\in\mathbb{Q}$? $\endgroup$ – Slade Oct 3 '14 at 8:45
  • $\begingroup$ @Slade You're right - this started out as a proof that there are no counterexamples for $n>2$ of that specific type, and then I forgot what I was trying to do. There may be counterexamples of a more general form. $\endgroup$ – Jack M Oct 3 '14 at 9:00
0
$\begingroup$

This is not an answer, but some insight and too long for a comment. I would be inclined to say yes, for the following reason. The equation above is equivalent to:

$x^{n-1} + (1-x)^{n-1} = z^n$.

Let $z = \frac{p}{q}$ with $p, q \in \mathbb{Z}$. Therefore,

$f(x) = q^nx^{n-1} + q^n(1-x)^{n-1} - p^n$

is a polynomial with integer coefficients. By the Rational root theorem, this means that there exists a rational solution for $f(x) = 0$.

However, since the domain is restricted to $(0, 1)$, this may not be correct. But there exists a rational solution for general choice of x and n.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ How is the equation equivalent to your first line? $\endgroup$ – Slade Oct 3 '14 at 5:18
  • $\begingroup$ y = 1-x as given in the description. $\endgroup$ – Ryan Oct 3 '14 at 5:19
  • $\begingroup$ And by @millikan's comment on the original post. $\endgroup$ – Ryan Oct 3 '14 at 5:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I still don't follow. This would say that $x^{1/2} + y^{1/2} = z \implies x+y=z^2$, which is only true when one of $x$ or $y$ is zero. $\endgroup$ – Slade Oct 3 '14 at 5:27
  • $\begingroup$ Huh, you're right. I guess @millikan's comment was wrong. $\endgroup$ – Ryan Oct 3 '14 at 5:29
0
$\begingroup$

If $m$ and $n$ are relatively prime positive integers, there are an infinite number of solutions to $x^n + y^n = z^m$ in positive integers.

This can be done using the fact that there are an infinite number of integer solutions to $an-bm = 1$.

In this case, since $n = m-1$, they are obviously relatively prime.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ How does this answer the question? Note that the OP is considering rational $x$, and $y = 1 - x$. Furthermore $x^{\frac{n-1}{n}} + y^{\frac{n-1}{n}} = z$ does not imply $x^{n-1} + y^{n-1} = z^n$ (although this seems to be the $3^\text{rd}$ time this mistake has been made on this page) $\endgroup$ – zcn Oct 3 '14 at 6:17

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.