Misplaced Pages

Kaplansky's theorem on quadratic forms

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Result on simultaneous representation of primes by quadratic forms

In mathematics, Kaplansky's theorem on quadratic forms is a result on simultaneous representation of primes by quadratic forms. It was proved in 2003 by Irving Kaplansky.

Statement of the theorem

Kaplansky's theorem states that a prime p congruent to 1 modulo 16 is representable by both or none of x + 32y and x + 64y, whereas a prime p congruent to 9 modulo 16 is representable by exactly one of these quadratic forms.

This is remarkable since the primes represented by each of these forms individually are not describable by congruence conditions.

Proof

Kaplansky's proof uses the facts that 2 is a 4th power modulo p if and only if p is representable by x + 64y, and that −4 is an 8th power modulo p if and only if p is representable by x + 32y.

Examples

  • The prime p = 17 is congruent to 1 modulo 16 and is representable by neither x + 32y nor x + 64y.
  • The prime p = 113 is congruent to 1 modulo 16 and is representable by both x + 32y and x+64y (since 113 = 9 + 32×1 and 113 = 7 + 64×1).
  • The prime p = 41 is congruent to 9 modulo 16 and is representable by x + 32y (since 41 = 3 + 32×1), but not by x + 64y.
  • The prime p = 73 is congruent to 9 modulo 16 and is representable by x + 64y (since 73 = 3 + 64×1), but not by x + 32y.

Similar results

Five results similar to Kaplansky's theorem are known:

  • A prime p congruent to 1 modulo 20 is representable by both or none of x + 20y and x + 100y, whereas a prime p congruent to 9 modulo 20 is representable by exactly one of these quadratic forms.
  • A prime p congruent to 1, 16 or 22 modulo 39 is representable by both or none of x + xy + 10y and x + xy + 127y, whereas a prime p congruent to 4, 10 or 25 modulo 39 is representable by exactly one of these quadratic forms.
  • A prime p congruent to 1, 16, 26, 31 or 36 modulo 55 is representable by both or none of x + xy + 14y and x + xy + 69y, whereas a prime p congruent to 4, 9, 14, 34 or 49 modulo 55 is representable by exactly one of these quadratic forms.
  • A prime p congruent to 1, 65 or 81 modulo 112 is representable by both or none of x + 14y and x + 448y, whereas a prime p congruent to 9, 25 or 57 modulo 112 is representable by exactly one of these quadratic forms.
  • A prime p congruent to 1 or 169 modulo 240 is representable by both or none of x + 150y and x + 960y, whereas a prime p congruent to 49 or 121 modulo 240 is representable by exactly one of these quadratic forms.

It is conjectured that there are no other similar results involving definite forms.

Notes

  1. Kaplansky, Irving (2003), "The forms x + 32y and x + 64y^2 [sic]", Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 131 (7): 2299–2300 (electronic), doi:10.1090/S0002-9939-03-07022-9, MR 1963780.
  2. Cox, David A. (1989), Primes of the form x + ny, New York: John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-471-50654-0, MR 1028322.
  3. Brink, David (2009), "Five peculiar theorems on simultaneous representation of primes by quadratic forms", Journal of Number Theory, 129 (2): 464–468, doi:10.1016/j.jnt.2008.04.007, MR 2473893.
Categories: