My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math Events

Math Events Math Events, Competitions, Meetups - Local, Regional, State, National, International


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
February 6th, 2014, 05:26 AM   #11
Math Team
 
agentredlum's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: North America, 42nd parallel

Posts: 3,372
Thanks: 233

Re: Pre-Q&A

You and I are thinking alike in this matter , i also tried x^5 + x + 1 and x^4 + x^2 + 1 , then attempted to find other poly's similar , came close with x^9 + 2x + 3 but alas 519 = 3*173 ... composite

Then i made a list of primes 520 < p < 588 and fooled around with



No success. I'm doing this with no programming usage ability so by now i am quite tired of editing WIA entries and pressing = every time.

BTW , I can't find anything i can see about Schur's Theorem that is relevent to CRG's claim in the other thread.

Found this but i'm not sure if it applies.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohn's_i ... _criterion

agentredlum is offline  
 
February 6th, 2014, 05:38 AM   #12
Math Team
 
mathbalarka's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: India, West Bengal

Posts: 3,871
Thanks: 86

Math Focus: Number Theory
Re: Pre-Q&A

Quote:
Originally Posted by agentredlum
Found this but i'm not sure if it applies.
Hmm, it does, but unfortunately, you need x = 10.
mathbalarka is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 05:49 AM   #13
Math Team
 
agentredlum's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: North America, 42nd parallel

Posts: 3,372
Thanks: 233

Re: Pre-Q&A

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathbalarka
Quote:
Originally Posted by agentredlum
Found this but i'm not sure if it applies.
Hmm, it does, but unfortunately, you need x = 10.
Can we do anything with



Where f(10) = 5 , f(2) = 5 and f(5) = 1 ?

agentredlum is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 05:50 AM   #14
Math Team
 
mathbalarka's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: India, West Bengal

Posts: 3,871
Thanks: 86

Math Focus: Number Theory
Re: Pre-Q&A

I doubt.
mathbalarka is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 05:54 AM   #15
Math Team
 
Joined: Apr 2010

Posts: 2,778
Thanks: 361

Re: Pre-Q&A

This is why I thought Schur's theorem could be applied here
Quote:
Originally Posted by [color=#AA0000
CRGreathouse[/color]]Let's see... here's one I don't think you'll have expected. First transform x -> x+1 to get x^4 + 6x^3 + 12x^2 + 9x + 1, then substitute x = 10 to get 17291. Note that this is prime, and that all coefficients are between 1 and 12. If they were between 0 and 9, Schur's theorem would tell us that the polynomial is irreducible.
Though I cannot see why it could work by the theorem itself.

f(2) is prime so perhaps, all coefficients of f are in {0, 1,...,9} so the polynomial is irreducible. But perhaps since it is about x = 2 instead of x = 10 it works for coeficients in {0, 1, 2} only. You have similar observations. Maybe the answer to the bonus question would then be "to mislead "us" (me at least)"
Hoempa is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 05:55 AM   #16
Math Team
 
agentredlum's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: North America, 42nd parallel

Posts: 3,372
Thanks: 233

Re: Pre-Q&A

Yeah , you're right. f(10) = 5 would mean we need negative coefficients ...!!

agentredlum is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 06:05 AM   #17
Math Team
 
agentredlum's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: North America, 42nd parallel

Posts: 3,372
Thanks: 233

Re: Pre-Q&A

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoempa
This is why I thought Schur's theorem could be applied here
Quote:
Originally Posted by [color=#AA0000
CRGreathouse[/color]]Let's see... here's one I don't think you'll have expected. First transform x -> x+1 to get x^4 + 6x^3 + 12x^2 + 9x + 1, then substitute x = 10 to get 17291. Note that this is prime, and that all coefficients are between 1 and 12. If they were between 0 and 9, Schur's theorem would tell us that the polynomial is irreducible.
Though I cannot see why it could work by the theorem itself.

f(2) is prime so perhaps, all coefficients of f are in {0, 1,...,9} so the polynomial is irreducible. But perhaps since it is about x = 2 instead of x = 10 it works for coeficients in {0, 1, 2} only. You have similar observations. Maybe the answer to the bonus question would then be "to mislead "us" (me at least)"
Yes , i understood why you made the comment but i hope CRG is not making us work on a problem that has no solution , that's why i attempted to find info on the net about Schur's Theorem , so i could judge for myself . but i didn't find anything that i personally understood as relevant. I haven't looked for the other reference he gives , Gross and Filaseta.

agentredlum is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 06:12 AM   #18
Math Team
 
mathbalarka's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: India, West Bengal

Posts: 3,871
Thanks: 86

Math Focus: Number Theory
Re: Pre-Q&A

Quote:
Originally Posted by agentredlum
Yes , i understood why you made the comment but i hope CRG is not making us work on a problem that has no solution
He is not, I am pretty sure of that.
mathbalarka is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 06:17 AM   #19
Math Team
 
agentredlum's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: North America, 42nd parallel

Posts: 3,372
Thanks: 233

Re: Pre-Q&A

[Deleted Joke]
agentredlum is offline  
February 6th, 2014, 08:24 PM   #20
Global Moderator
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
From: UTC -5

Posts: 16,046
Thanks: 937

Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms
Re: Pre-Q&A

Quote:
Originally Posted by agentredlum
Found this but i'm not sure if it applies.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohn's_i ... _criterion
Yes, that's it. Apparently I don't do very well without my notes.

It gets worse: it looks like I mixed up my inequalities when posting this question, and I should have allowed 0..10 rather than 0..9. Those of you who suspected the problem was unsolvable were probably right... but I have it on good authority that the problem with 0..10 is solvable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathbalarka
Quote:
Originally Posted by agentredlum
Yes , i understood why you made the comment but i hope CRG is not making us work on a problem that has no solution
He is not, I am pretty sure of that.
Sorry to (slightly) let you down. I'm pretty sure the corrected version works, though I haven't attempted to find a solution yet.
CRGreathouse is offline  
Reply

  My Math Forum > Math Forums > Math Events

Tags
preqanda



Thread Tools
Display Modes






Copyright © 2017 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.