35

This is an extract from Apéry's biography (which some of the people have already enjoyed in this answer).

During a mathematician's dinner in Kingston, Canada, in 1979, the conversation turned to Fermat's last theorem, and Enrico Bombieri proposed a problem: to show that the equation $$ \binom xn+\binom yn=\binom zn \qquad\text{where}\quad n\ge 3 $$ has no nontrivial solution. Apéry left the table and came back at breakfast with the solution $n = 3$, $x = 10$, $y = 16$, $z = 17$. Bombieri replied stiffly, "I said nontrivial."

What is the state of art for the equation above? Was it seriously studied?

Edit. I owe the following official name of the problem to Gerry, as well as Alf van der Poorten's (different!) point of view on this story and some useful links on the problem (see Gerry's comments and response). The name is Bombieri's Napkin Problem. As the OEIS link suggests, Bombieri said that

"the equation $\binom xn+\binom yn=\binom zn$ has no trivial solutions for $n\ge 3$"

(the joke being that he said "trivial" rather than "nontrivial"!).

As Gerry indicates in his comments, the special case $n=3$ has a long history started from the 1915 paper [Bökle, Z. Math. Naturwiss. Unterricht 46 (1915), 160]; this is reflected in [A. Bremner, Duke Math. J. 44 (1977) 757--765]. A related link is [F. Beukers, Fifth Conference of the Canadian Number Theory Association, 25--33] for which I could not find an MR link. Leech's paper indicates the particular solution $$ \binom{132}{4}+\binom{190}{4}=\binom{200}{4} $$ and the trivial infinite family $$ \binom{2n-1}n+\binom{2n-1}n=\binom{2n}n. $$

Wadim Zudilin
  • 13,404
  • Does it have a name? – Andrey Rekalo Jun 07 '10 at 03:18
  • If it were, I could put it in the title. :-) Jokes aside, I searched some time ago for this equation in the diophantine literature but found nothing. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 07 '10 at 03:28
  • Hi Wadim, not all that similar, but note this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beal%27s_conjecture

    The link may or may not work, anyway it's Beal's conjecture

    – Will Jagy Jun 07 '10 at 03:43
  • 2
    Yep, not very similar but at least with a name. :-) – Wadim Zudilin Jun 07 '10 at 03:51
  • 2
    By the way, this story is one of the reasons I felt that Apéry was stiffed by "mathematical community" (and Bombieri isn't even French). – Victor Protsak Jun 07 '10 at 03:57
  • What does non-trivial mean here? :) There are quite a few solutions. – Gjergji Zaimi Jun 07 '10 at 04:01
  • Yes, Victor, Apéry was mathematically in a shadow. I spoke with many witnesses of his discovery of $\zeta(3)\notin\mathbb Q$; he didn't look a genius, that's why he was easily stiffed. @Gjergji, I don't clarify the word "non-trivial" for solutions. I just wonder whether there exists a finite list of solutions ($n\ge 3$) or any other results on this equation. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 07 '10 at 05:47
  • A professor of mine once told me that he went to the conference in which Apery first showed his proof. He said that even on that day, before the lecture, other professors were saying that Apery is too old and must have a mistake. – Dror Speiser Jun 07 '10 at 06:34
  • 3
    @Wadim, even for $2\binom{x}{n}=\binom{x+2}{n}$ there are infinitely many solutions with arbitrarily large $n$, $n_0=1,n_1=6$ and following $n_{k+1}=6n_k-n_{k-1}$. – Gjergji Zaimi Jun 07 '10 at 07:17
  • Honestly saying, I did not know that. Without calling these solutions "trivial" (I am not Bombieri!), I would say that they fall in a very clear infinite family. And this family is quite interesting! – Wadim Zudilin Jun 07 '10 at 07:56
  • 11
    I guess after removing also the infinite family that comes from $\binom{x}{n}+\binom{x+1}{n}=\binom{x+2}{n}$, one might expect there to be only finitely many solutions. But still there are more "sporadic" solutions out there. FLT is famous for being easy to state and hard to solve. This question seems to be hard to state :-) – Gjergji Zaimi Jun 07 '10 at 08:15
  • This justifies the absense of name! :-) I don't know whether that was Enrico's joke or he had something about this equation in mind... If you can do a reasonable conjecture about the structure of solutions, I would encourage you to post it as answer. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 07 '10 at 08:25
  • @Stephen, $x=x$, $y=x+1$, $z=x+2$ (for certain $x$!) and $n=n_k$ is taken from an infinite sequence $n_1,n_2,n_3,\dots$ which satisfies a certain recursion. A similar family with $y=x$ and $z=x+2$ is discussed in more details in Gjergji's comment above. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 07 '10 at 13:55
  • Dear Wadim, I deleted my comment when I realized that Gjergji meant that for certain n, there would be infinitely many solutions x. Apparently I did this crossing paths with you Wadim. Sorry! –  Jun 07 '10 at 14:04
  • @Wadim: I fixed the two (very bad) typos, but then I saw that they were also in the original. I think it's ok to fix them, but if you want to be very faithful you can add them back with the [sic] annotation, as is usually done. – François G. Dorais Jun 07 '10 at 15:19
  • @François, thank you! Also for the tip to use the sic annotation (I'll do next time). It seems that the English translation of the biography is online only, full of typos (the original version by Roger's son is in French and published). @Stephen: no worries! I realize many things much later, this pretty normal. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 07 '10 at 21:17
  • 3
    There is a small-but-crucial difference in the way the story is told in Alf van der Poorten, Notes on Fermat's Last Theorem, page 122:

    Michel Mendes France reminds me to tell the story of Bombieri's napkin. At the Queen's University number theory meeting in 1979, Roger Apery was a victim of Enrico Bombieri's observation that "the equation $${x\choose n}+{y\choose n}={z\choose n}$$ has no trivial solutions for $n\ge3$." At breakfast, next morning, Apery excitedly reported having spent the night finding the smallest example $x=10$, $y=16$, $z=17$, with $n=3$. Continued, next comment...

    – Gerry Myerson Jun 08 '10 at 03:11
  • 3
    (continued from previous comment) "Just so," responded Bombieri, "I said there was no trivial solution!"

    It's easy to miss it, but Alf's version has "trivial" where the quote above has "nontrivial." Unless Alf got bit by a typo, this makes it a very different (and somewhat strange) story. For one thing, as noted in earlier comments, there certainly are trivial solutions. For another thing, what has the story to do with Bombieri's napkin?

    – Gerry Myerson Jun 08 '10 at 03:17
  • If you type "Integral Points on Cubic Surfaces" into Google, the first thing that comes up is Beukers' paper. – Gerry Myerson Jun 08 '10 at 12:42
  • Wadim: here is a Zentralblatt link: http://www.zentralblatt-math.org/zmath/en/advanced/?q=an:0936.11019&format=complete – Victor Protsak Jun 08 '10 at 17:06
  • Question on this topic now raised at m.se, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3844355/fermats-last-theorem-analogue-for-binomial-coefficients-combinatorial-inter – Gerry Myerson Sep 29 '20 at 21:28

3 Answers3

12

Some solutions for $n=3$ can be found at http://www.oeis.org/A010330 where there is also a reference to J. Leech, Some solutions of Diophantine equations, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 53 (1957), 778-780, MR 19, 837f (but from the review it seems that paper deals with ${x\choose n}+{y\choose n}={z\choose n}+{w\choose n}$).

There are some other solutions at http://www.numericana.com/fame/apery.htm

EDIT Here are some more references for $n=3$:

Andrzej Krawczyk, A certain property of pyramidal numbers, Prace Nauk. Inst. Mat. Fiz. Politechn. Wrocƚaw. Ser. Studia i Materiaƚy No. 3 Teoria grafow (1970), 43--44, MR 51 #3048.

The author proves that for any natural number $m$ there exist distinct natural numbers $x$ and $y$ such that $P_x+P_y=P_{y+m}$ where $P_n=n(n+1)(n+2)/6$. (J. S. Joel)

M. Wunderlich, Certain properties of pyramidal and figurate numbers, Math. Comp. 16 (1962) 482--486, MR 26 #6115.

The author gives a lot of solutions of $x^3+y^3+z^3=x+y+z$ (which is equivalent to the equation we want). In his review, S Chowla claims to have proved the existence of infinitely many non-trivial solutions.

W. Sierpiński, Sur un propriété des nombres tétraédraux, Elem. Math. 17 1962 29--30, MR 24 #A3118.

This contains a proof that there are infinitely many solutions with $n=3$.

A. Oppenheim, On the Diophantine equation $x^3+y^3+z^3=x+y+z$, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 17 1966 493--496, MR 32 #5590.

Hugh Maxwell Edgar, Some remarks on the Diophantine equation $x^3+y^3+z^3=x+y+z$, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 16 1965 148--153, MR 30 #1094.

A. Oppenheim, On the Diophantine equation $x^3+y^3-z^3=px+py-qz$, Univ. Beograd. Publ. Elektrotehn. Fak. Ser. Mat. Fiz. No. 230-241 1968 33--35, MR 39 #126.

Gerry Myerson
  • 39,024
  • Gerry, thank you for the links! I vote. BTW, this will let you edit my post (>2000 reps) by adding your nice comments from Alf. Keep in mind that the biography above represents Apery's original point of view, while Alf sees everything from his side. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 05:21
  • Gerry, I personally don't like the numericana link. Leech, among some things, briefly discusses $n=3$ (http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0305004100032850), so all the links are in fact about $n=3$, except more general results on numericana which are discussed in the above comments by Gjergji. Are the solutions for $n=3$ "spontaneous"? Are there examples for $n>3$, different from the two Gjergji's families? I am really happy of getting the name and references, but the question on was a serious research done towards this problem remains. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 06:15
  • @Wadim, thanks for the link to Leech. He gives one solution for $n=4$. Another source for $n=3$ is Frits Beukers, Integral points on cubic surfaces, Fifth Conference of the Canadian Number Theory Association, 25-33 - see mid-page 26, and in particular Beukers' reference to Andrew Bremner, Integer points on a special cubic surface, Duke Math J 44 (1977) 757-765. Beukers traces $n=3$ back to 1915. – Gerry Myerson Jun 08 '10 at 07:35
  • O-oh! I now understand Frits' explanation of why he was tied to Apery in his original research: his PhD thesis is reflected in the reference you provide (it's not easy to get it here but I'll do) and later he gave the most elegant proof of the irrationality of $\zeta(2)$ and $\zeta(3)$. There are so many nice contemporary stories in maths... Thank you very much for these links to Beukers and Bremner! I'll probably need to ask some details directly from Frits. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 08:29
  • It seems that Frits' PhD was more about the Ramanujan--Nagell equation (MR0541444), and his interests in the binomial FLT are reflected in that Canadian publication only. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 08:54
  • Yes: F. Beukers, Integral points on cubic surfaces, CRM Proceedings and Lecture Notes 19 (1999), 25-33. My google search produced a different list but then I added "Beukers". :-) The paper does not provide any additional information for the cubic case: "A systematic account of these polynomial solutions is given by A. Bremner." – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 13:36
  • That's a serious update! Somebody borrowed Guy's Unsolved Problems from the library, so that I can't check D8 for the moment... Another unreachable text is Bökle's from 1915 which as far as I understand from Bremner's paper already has infinitely many solutions for $n=3$. – Wadim Zudilin Jun 09 '10 at 12:01
  • D8: "Wunderlich asks for (a parametric representation of) all solutions of the equation $x^3+y^3+z^3=x+y+z$. Bernstein, S. Chowla, Edgar, Fraenkel, Oppenheim, Segal, and Sierpinski have given solutions, some of them parametric, so there are certainly infinitely many. Eighty-eight of them have unknowns less than 13000. Bremner has effectively determined all parametric solutions." Guy then gives 10 references, most of which have already been given here, and none of them more recent than the Bremner paper from 1977. – Gerry Myerson Jun 10 '10 at 00:11
  • Thanks, Gerry! So, D8 is about $n=3$ as well. I would say that it's a right time to accept your answer, even both your and Gjergji's responses and comments gave me a real understanding of what is known and what is not. The problem for $n>3$, besides the "trivial" infinite families, is pretty open... – Wadim Zudilin Jun 10 '10 at 02:29
7

My first instinct is to say it seems unlikely there's been serious progress on this problem for general n. Unlike the Fermat equation, this one is not homogeneous of degree n, which means that it's really a question about points on a surface rather than points on a curve. We don't have a giant toolbox for controlling rational or integral points on surfaces as we do for curves.

In fact, I can't think of any example of a family of surfaces of growing degree where we can prove a theorem like "there are no nontrivial solutions for n > N." OK, I guess one knows this about the symmetric squares of X_1(n) by Merel...

JSE
  • 19,081
5

Another paper that mentions the problem is "Explicit Solutions of Pyramidal Diophantine Equations" by L.Bernstein Canad. Math. Bull. Vol. 15(2) from 1972! In fact I realized that this problem could have appeared in literature long before expressed in terms of "figurate numbers". Anyway an interesting list of references (I haven't found most of them yet though) can be found on section D8 of R.Guy's "Unsolved Problems in Number Theory".

Also two more OEIS links with useful information. I would also like to find this article by H. Harborth, "Fermat-like binomial equations", Applications of Fibonacci numbers, Proc. 2nd Int. Conf., San Jose/Ca., August 1986, 1-5 (1988). (Link)

As a conclusion, the problem has been mentioned in several papers, and many special cases have been given a lot of attention. Bombieri doesn't seem to be the original source of the question.

Gjergji Zaimi
  • 85,056
  • Thanks, Gjergji, for your digging! Bombieri just gave a name to the problem. :-) How one can get Harborth's article? The link to Guy's unsolved problems is really a must (I always underestimate this book because many of the problems there are of insufficient interest, I can't find there a serious problem for a talented student). – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 13:58
  • I'll pass by the library to look for Harborth's article a little later (they apparently have a copy), I couldn't find a link though. I felt the same about Guy's unsolved problems but this is the second time I try to find some information on an open problem and that book turns out to be one of the best reference places. (http://mathoverflow.net/questions/24265/what-is-the-limit-of-gcd1-2-n-1-n ) – Gjergji Zaimi Jun 08 '10 at 14:10
  • I've already voted on your answer there. I didn't know that Guy has links to Kurepa's conjecture, but this one is really famous and I studied it from a different prospective (http://mathoverflow.net/questions/24740/non-real-constants/24752#24752). – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 14:14
  • Well it was Kurepa's conjecture with a -1 which didn't seem to be that famous. :-) – Gjergji Zaimi Jun 08 '10 at 14:24
  • Yes, I just realized (2nd time!) that 24265 had a wrong question (and it is what is collected in Guy's book :-) ). – Wadim Zudilin Jun 08 '10 at 14:31