Reference for $a^n+b^n+c^n$ has bounded distinct prime factors iff $a=b=c$

259 Views Asked by At

Theorem: Let $a,b,c$ be positive integers for which $a^n+b^n+c^n$ has at most $k$ distinct prime divisors for all integers $n\ge 1$, for some fixed constant $k$. Then $a=b=c$.


I read from an old thread on AoPS that this result is due to a certain Reutter. I tried to search his name, but I really didn't find anything..

Can you find a refence for the above result?

3

There are 3 best solutions below

10
On BEST ANSWER

likely this Otmar Reutter, probably no Ph.D., who is quoted in a 1963 issue of Elemente der Mathematik, volume 18, pageS 89-90. Found in SIERPINSKI pages 27-28, 123 at reference 17. At the time, O. Reutter lived in Ochsenhausen, Germany. Maybe the Swiss digital library gives a way to search Elemente for all contributions (including this challenge answer) by him. Or her.

Hmmm. Maybe not. But, maybe once a year, the M.A.A. Monthly lists all the people who answered something in the "Problems and Solutions" column that year. Elemente might do something similar.

enter image description here

16
On

from AOPS in 2004.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

A. March 6, 2004: Let $a,b,c$ be natural numbers (nonzero), such that $a^n + b^n + c^n$ has finite prime divisors, $n=1,2,\ldots$

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

G. March 13, 2004, 1:35 PM: Let's assume they aren't equal. Then let $d = \gcd(a,b,c).$ we can obviously work with $a'=a/d,$ $b'=b/d,$ $c'=c/d,$ which are not all equal to $1,$ and $\gcd(a',b',c')=1.$ Let me call $a'=a, b'=b, c'=c$ (for simplicity).

Let $p_i$ be the primes which are the divisors of $$S_n = a^n + b^n + c^n,$$ with $i$ from $1$ to $k.$ Let $$ n_0 = 2 \Pi (p_i - 1). $$ If one of the numbers $a,b,c$ is divisible by $p_i,$ then $$S_{n_0} \equiv 2 \pmod {p_i},$$ and if none of the numbers $a,b,c$ is divisible by $p_i,$ then $$S_{n_0} \equiv 3 \pmod {p_i}.$$ This means that $S_{k n_0}$ is of the form $2^x 3^y$ for all $k \in \mathbf N.$ It's easy to see that it's $2 \pmod 4$ because of the $2$ in front of the product, so it has either the form $2 \cdot 3^x$ or $3^x.$

I'll finish it a bit later, cause my mom wants some time on the computer, so she's rushing me.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

G. March 13, 2004, 6:54 PM: I'll pick up from where I left:

Let $$ A = a^{n_0}. $$ In the same way we get $B$ and $C$ from $b$ and $c$ respectively. We have $$ A^k + B^k + C^k =$$ a power of $3$ for all $k$ or $2 \cdot$ a power of $3$ for all $k.$ Let's assume it's the first one (the second is basically the same).

At the same time, we have $\gcd(A,B,C) = 1.$ This means that at least 2 of $A,B,C$ are coprime with $$ A^t + B^t + C^t, $$ with $t$ chosen such that the sum is greater than $3$ ( such a $t$ exists, because we assume $A,$ $B,$ or $C > 1$), so let's assume those two are $A$ and $B.$ Take $k$ to be $$ k = \phi(A^t + B^t + C^t). $$ If $3|C$ we get $$ A^k + B^k + C^k \equiv 2 \pmod {3^{\mbox{something}}} $$ which is false, and if $3$ does not divide $C,$ we get $$ A^k + B^k + C^k \equiv 3 \pmod {3^{\mbox{something} > 1}} $$ so we have a contradiction again.

I think this ends it.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

P. March 13, 2004, 11:41 PM: Dear G, sorry, maybe I am stupid, but I do not see why $k n_0$ has the form $2^x 3^y.$ Please explain me, cause really this problem take me so long time though the case of two numbers is easy to see! (This is called Reutter theorem)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

G. March 13, 2004, 11:54 PM: If, for example, $a$ is divisible by $p_i,$ then $b$ and $c$ aren't (we assume $\gcd(a,b,c)=1$), so $$ b^{k n_0} \equiv c^{k n_0} \equiv 1 \pmod {p_i} $$ and $a \equiv 0 \pmod {p_i},$ so $$ S_{k n_0} \equiv 2 \pmod {p_i} $$

If, on the other hand, none of $a,b,c$ are divisible by $p_i$ (this is for a certain $i$ from $1$ to $k$), then $$ a^{k n_0} \equiv b^{k n_0} \equiv c^{k n_0} \equiv 1 \pmod {p_i}, $$ so $$ S_{k n_0} \equiv 3 \pmod {p_i} $$

This means that the remainder of $ S_{k n_0} \pmod {p_i} $ is either $2$ or $3,$ for all $i$ from $1$ to $k.$ If there is a prime divisor of $ S_{k n_0}$ other than $2$ or $3,$ then it can't be among $p_i$ with $i$ from $1$ to $k,$ so the prime divisors of $ S_{k n_0}$ aren't contained in the finite set (this was the initial assumption: that all $S_t$ have their prime divisors in the finite set $$ \{ p_i | 1 \leq i \leq k \}. $$ This shows that the form of $ S_{k n_0}$ is $2^x 3^y.$

Hope it's all correct and clear.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

P. March 15, 2004, 4:26 AM: Well done, G, I think it's correct!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

2
On

[Just an attempt to rewrite the above proof, due to grobber]

(Weaker) Claim: Let $a,b,c$ be positive integers. Then the set of prime divisors of $\{a^n+b^n+c^n: n\ge 1\}$ is finite if and only if $a=b=c$.

Proof: The if part is trivial. For the converse, let us suppose without loss of generality that $\text{gcd}(a,b,c)=1$ (in particular, at least one is greater than $1$), define the sequence $(S_n)_{n\ge 1}$ by $S_n:=a^n+b^n+c^n$, and assume by contradition that the set $P$ of primes dividing at least one $S_n$ is finite.

Define $n_0=2\prod_{p \in P}{(p_i-1)}$. Then the factorization of $S_{n_0}$ will have by hypothesis only primes in $P$. In particular, for each prime $p \in P$, at most one integer in $\{a,b,c\}$ can be multiple of $p$. It follows that, for each $p \in P$ and each $k\ge 1$, it holds $S_{kn_0}=a^{kn_0}+b^{kn_0}+c^{kn_0}$ has remainder $2$ or $3$ modulo $p$. But these remainders have to be $0$ modulo some $p \in P$, hence $S_{kn_0}$ will be of the type $2^x 3^y$ for some nonnegative integers $x,y$.

Notice that $n_0$ is even, therefore $S_{kn_0}$ cannot be multiple of $4$, since by assumption $a,b$ and $c$ cannot be all even. Moreover all $\{S_{kn_0}: k\ge 1\}$ have the same parity. Hence they will be all of the type $2\cdot 3^y$ or $3^y$, for some integers $y$. We solve the second case:

We must have $S_{kn_0}$ divides $S_{(k+1)n_0}$ whenever $k$ is sufficiently large. Notice that at least two between $a,b,c$ have to be coprime with $S_{tn_0}$, where $t$ is a sufficiently large fixed positive integer. By construction $S_{tn_0}$ is a power of $3$, let us say $3^q$, with $q\ge 2$. Then $S_{(t-1)n_0}$ has to divide $S_{tn_0}$, which is impossible modulo $9$.