Author |
Topic: two pythagorean triples (Read 2776 times) |
|
Christine
Full Member
Posts: 159
|
|
two pythagorean triples
« on: Jul 16th, 2013, 10:30am » |
Quote Modify
|
Is it possible to find two pythagorean triples (a, b, c) and (d, e, f) such that (1) a+d, b+e, and c+f are all squares (2) a+d, b+e, and c+f are all cubes If this (1) and/or (2) not possible, find the near misses
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: two pythagorean triples
« Reply #1 on: Jul 16th, 2013, 1:03pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Being lazy, I let the computer do the work on (1), with the following solutions for a-f below 1000: 33 544 545 256 480 544 66 112 130 130 144 194 120 442 458 280 342 442 264 448 520 520 576 776 585 928 1097 640 672 928 No cubes so far, so perhaps applying some more intelligence is called for there.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
JohanC
Senior Riddler
Posts: 460
|
|
Re: two pythagorean triples
« Reply #2 on: Jul 19th, 2013, 5:38pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 16th, 2013, 1:03pm, towr wrote:Being lazy, I let the computer do the work on (1), with the following solutions for a-f below 1000: .... 585 928 1097 640 672 928 .... |
| Hi Towr, Your last solution seems to have one number above 1000. My list of squares with a-f below 1000 would be: 36 48 60 493 276 565 345 460 575 280 165 325 120 225 255 780 451 901 256 480 544 33 544 545 25 60 65 96 40 104 100 240 260 384 160 416 225 540 585 864 360 936 120 442 458 280 342 442 66 112 130 130 144 194 264 448 520 520 576 776 Do you really think some non-trivial search optimization would be possible for this puzzle?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: two pythagorean triples
« Reply #3 on: Jul 20th, 2013, 2:15am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jul 19th, 2013, 5:38pm, JohanC wrote:Your last solution seems to have one number above 1000. |
| Yeah, in truth I just calculated c and f and had no check on them. And I missed a few because I specified a<b and d<e (allowing d>e finds the missing ones). Quote:Do you really think some non-trivial search optimization would be possible for this puzzle? |
| Well, I suspect that with perhaps some modular arithmetic it's possible to show the cube case is impossible. There comes a point when it's smarter to see if what you're searching for exists than it is to keep searching.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
JohanC
Senior Riddler
Posts: 460
|
|
Re: two pythagorean triples
« Reply #4 on: Jul 20th, 2013, 6:43am » |
Quote Modify
|
Hi Towr, The cubes seem to need at least 6 digits: 4884 53613 53835 161491 131580 208309 67488 71891 98605 148512 94484 176020 186760 234117 299483 156240 15930 157050 But so far, no solutions with d<e popped up. Neither do primitive solutions to the squares' puzzle, but I imagine the smallest such solutions could be very hugh. Once again you're right with your suggestion to involve modular arithmetic.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
JohanC
Senior Riddler
Posts: 460
|
|
Re: two pythagorean triples
« Reply #5 on: Jul 24th, 2013, 4:23am » |
Quote Modify
|
Looking for cube solutions smaller than 500000, 2 more pop up, one of them in the "natural" order: 8120 80997 81403 334880 169050 375130 18500 44400 48100 147875 171600 226525
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|