You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
An elliptic curve is of the form
y²=x³+ax²+bx+c where a,b, and c are integers.
When a=0, b=0 and c=-2, the equation becomes
y²=x³-2
Leonard Euler was the first to prove that this equation has only one solution, y=5 and x=3. Thus, he proved that 26 is the only number among the infinity of numbers which is jammed between a perfect square and a perfect cube.
The proof is lengthy and sophisticated even for the present day mathematicians.
The Prince of Mathematicians, Euler, who is belived to have contributed more to mathematics than any other individual was also the first to make amajore breakthrough in proving Fermat's Last theorem. He had proved that
a³+b³ = c³ has no solution where a,b, and c are whole numbers, the only exception being a=b=c=0.
Generations of mathematicians later proved Fermat's Last theorem for certain prime number values of n. It was only during the fag end of the twentieth century that Andrew Wiles finally succeeded in proving Fermat's Last Theorem.
It appears to me that if one wants to make progress in mathematics, one should study the masters and not the pupils. - Niels Henrik Abel.
Nothing is better than reading and gaining more and more knowledge - Stephen William Hawking.
Offline
Elliptic curves over the field of rationals are related to modular forms a result which was crucial to the proving of Fermats last theorem by Andrew Wiles.
Offline
You're correct, JaneFairfax!
The relation between elliptic curves and modular forms was studied by Yukata Taniyama and Goro Shimura about 10 years after the second world war in Japan leading to the famous Shimura-Taniyama Conjecture on which Andrew Wiles' proof is based.
Go to this link.
It appears to me that if one wants to make progress in mathematics, one should study the masters and not the pupils. - Niels Henrik Abel.
Nothing is better than reading and gaining more and more knowledge - Stephen William Hawking.
Offline
Leonard Euler was the first to prove that this equation has only one solution, y=5 and x=3. Thus, he proved that 26 is the only number among the infinity of numbers which is jammed between a perfect square and a perfect cube.
The proof is lengthy and sophisticated even for the present day mathematicians.
The Prince of Mathematicians, Euler, who is belived to have contributed more to mathematics than any other individual was also the first to make amajore breakthrough in proving Fermat's Last theorem. He had proved that
a³+b³ = c³ has no solution where a,b, and c are whole numbers, the only exception being a=b=c=0.
Generations of mathematicians later proved Fermat's Last theorem for certain prime number values of n. It was only during the fag end of the twentieth century that Andrew Wiles finally succeeded in proving Fermat's Last Theorem.
It was Fermat who proved that 26 is the only number between a perfect square and cube.
Also, the proof that a³ + b³ = c³ has no solutions was only a tiny part of the solution. Find a piece of evidence in an infinity to support a hypothesis (regardless of how hard it was to find) is useless (this has been demonstrated by the Riemann Hypothesis in which millions of zeroes have been found upon Riemanns critical line, not furthering research particularly).
Offline
Last edited by zetafunc (2016-05-23 19:42:48)
Offline
If we do not return to our original point, then P is a point of infinite order.
Offline
The Lutz-Nagell Theorem
Let have order . Then:(a) (b) If then . If , then . Thus, is finite.We can explicitly write the possibilities Tors(E(Q)) by Mazur's theorem.
Mazur's Theorem
Either for some or , or for some .Offline
Examples of Computing Tors(E(Q))
Let be an elliptic curve. We compute the discriminant to be , and note that if we have a point of order k > 2, then by the Lutz-Nagell theorem we must have . But the only possible values for y in that case are . But substituting these values of y into E, we see that there are no possible solutions for x over the rationals. Note that if y = 0, then we again have no solutions, so there are no points of order k = 2. Therefore, we only have the trivial point of order 1, the point at infinity, .Offline
Hi;
Do you use the elliptic discriminant http://mathworld.wolfram.com/EllipticDiscriminant.html to get that
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
I am surprised to know about elliptic curves of rational numbers and corresponding modular form.
Last edited by thickhead (2016-05-24 00:19:48)
{1}Vasudhaiva Kutumakam.{The whole Universe is a family.}
(2)Yatra naaryasthu poojyanthe Ramanthe tatra Devataha
{Gods rejoice at those places where ladies are respected.}
Offline
Another Example of Computing Tors(E(Q))
Let be an elliptic curve. We compute the discriminant to be , so that if we have a point of order k > 2 on E, then by the Lutz-Nagell theorem we must have , so the possibilities are . Substituting these values into E we obtain the following points:. But using the duplication formula, these cannot be torsion points. Thus, there are no points of order k > 2.Since a point has order 2 if and only if its y co-ordinate is 0, then we see that is the only point of order 2. Moreover, as usual, the point at infinity is also a torsion point (of order 1).Offline
Height and Elliptic Curves
For a given rational number where m,n are coprime, define its height to be . If denotes the x co-ordinate of a point , then write . We take .If is an elliptic curve, define the height of an elliptic curve to be . From this we can derive the inequality:A useful consequence: if satisfies , then has infinite order!Offline
Néron-Tate Height
Suppose we define the height in a slightly different way. Let , so that the inequality in post #13 implies that . Replacing with and dividing by , we get:Summing over k from m+1 to n, we get:
so that we have a Cauchy sequence (and therefore it converges). We call this limit the Néron-Tate height:
Offline
The Weierstrass Elliptic Function
We say a function is doubly periodic if for some we have .Define the lattice , and the parallelogram . Let .Define the Eisenstein series of weight k to be:.We define the Weierstrass elliptic function as follows:
.It can be shown that it converges absolutely, is periodic on the lattice and is even. Moreover, any meromorphic,
-periodic function is a rational function of and .We have an isomorphism of groups: . Hence, every lattice may be associated with an elliptic curve! (And the converse is true as well.)Offline
Offline
Pages: 1